Andrew Tate - The Real World
Discussion
Archie2050 said:
Abdul Abulbul Amir said:
No it isn't the same thing, In my view, in a fair legal system as person must be charged as soon as possible and not held for a prolonged period without being charged.
There is a clear difference in the period before and after being charged, as it stands you have someone locked up that hasn't been formally accused of any wrong-doing.
Are there any other detainees currently in custody in Romania that you are concerned about?There is a clear difference in the period before and after being charged, as it stands you have someone locked up that hasn't been formally accused of any wrong-doing.
Abdul Abulbul Amir said:
paulguitar said:
Having said that, since CCD disappeared it's fun to have a Tate supporter back here, although presumably, you'd not admit to being so.
Appreciate it's the Tate thread and most are incapable of objective thought but I'd hope at least some are capable.
freetopg
tangerine_sedge said:
The judge and tates legal team, following the laws of the country that they are all in, seem to have a better idea of the legality of this situation than a random "I'm not a tate supporter but..." on the internet.
Sorry buddy, I can't keep repeating that I'm not stating that the legal process isn't being followed.Abdul Abulbul Amir said:
Archie2050 said:
Abdul Abulbul Amir said:
No it isn't the same thing, In my view, in a fair legal system as person must be charged as soon as possible and not held for a prolonged period without being charged.
There is a clear difference in the period before and after being charged, as it stands you have someone locked up that hasn't been formally accused of any wrong-doing.
Are there any other detainees currently in custody in Romania that you are concerned about?There is a clear difference in the period before and after being charged, as it stands you have someone locked up that hasn't been formally accused of any wrong-doing.
Abdul Abulbul Amir said:
Not correct, my posts are continually saying that, in my opinion, if there is evidence to charge him they should charge him asap, if there is no evidence to charge him he should be released.
The prosecution should not be using this time pre-charge to build their case against him, this should be done in the period after he is charged and before the trial is held...this is the period where he is held on remand (he currently isn't on remand).
I'll ignore your response to me & instead focus on this which I note you have repeated since. Breaking it into two parts, the first implies Romania are just fThe prosecution should not be using this time pre-charge to build their case against him, this should be done in the period after he is charged and before the trial is held...this is the period where he is held on remand (he currently isn't on remand).
Edited by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Friday 3rd March 10:00
king with Tate because reasons. Then this:Abdul Abulbul Amir said:
Sorry buddy, I can't keep repeating that I'm not stating that the legal process isn't being followed.
Yeah right. That's exactly what you're trying and failing to do.Part two:
You don't know what the prosecution are doing and apart from that, this is exactly what reasonable judicial bodies do the world over. You are under arrest ON SUSPICION OF this or that. Into jail you go while we prepare a case for trial. Literally the process.
Putting this as gently as I can, people are queueing up to point out you are out of your depth in a puddle here. We get you're a Top G stan, I'm just saying it for you because you seem unwilling to.
President Merkin said:
Abdul Abulbul Amir said:
Not correct, my posts are continually saying that, in my opinion, if there is evidence to charge him they should charge him asap, if there is no evidence to charge him he should be released.
The prosecution should not be using this time pre-charge to build their case against him, this should be done in the period after he is charged and before the trial is held...this is the period where he is held on remand (he currently isn't on remand).
I'll ignore your response to me The prosecution should not be using this time pre-charge to build their case against him, this should be done in the period after he is charged and before the trial is held...this is the period where he is held on remand (he currently isn't on remand).
Edited by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Friday 3rd March 10:00
Abdul Abulbul Amir said:
Sorry buddy, I can't keep repeating that I'm not stating that the legal process isn't being followed.
Yeah right. That's exactly what you're trying and failing to do.Abdul Abulbul Amir said:
MarkwG said:
Abdul Abulbul Amir said:
MarkwG said:
Your posts continually refer to releasing him from custody, when he's in custody whilst the prosecution prepare their case, & because he's a flight risk; he has said he'd go to Dubai rather than face a trial: therefore releasing him early is circumventing the system, allowing him to flee exactly as he described. The Romanian system has been scrupulously followed, which he previously said was unlikely & why he chose to live there - more fool him.
You're not representing for anyone else held in a Romanian jail under similar circumstances, & you're ignoring all the evidence he has provided for himself; you bleat about it being "unfair", so why isn't it also unfair on them? The reason is, that's the system, fair is treating him the same as anyone else in his position, not giving him special treatment because he's Andrew Tate - which is exactly what' your suggesting.
Not correct, my posts are continually saying that, in my opinion, if there is evidence to charge him they should charge him asap, if there is no evidence to charge him he should be released. You're not representing for anyone else held in a Romanian jail under similar circumstances, & you're ignoring all the evidence he has provided for himself; you bleat about it being "unfair", so why isn't it also unfair on them? The reason is, that's the system, fair is treating him the same as anyone else in his position, not giving him special treatment because he's Andrew Tate - which is exactly what' your suggesting.
The prosecution should not be using this time pre-charge to build their case against him, this should be done in the period after he is charged and before the trial is held...this is the period where he is held on remand (he currently isn't on demand).
There is a clear difference in the period before and after being charged, as it stands you have someone locked up that hasn't been formally accused of any wrong-doing.
1. Someone being charged
2. A Judge reviewing all the evidence to date, receiving representations from the defendants lawyers, and then making a decision as to whether they should be detained?
President Merkin said:
Part two:
You don't know what the prosecution are doing and apart from that, this is exactly what reasonable judicial bodies do the world over. You are under arrest ON SUSPICION OF this or that. Into jail you go while we prepare a case for trial. Literally the process.
Putting this as gently as I can, people are queueing up to point out you are out of your depth in a puddle here. We get you're a Top G stan, I'm just saying it for you because you seem unwilling to.
Sorry, you, and others, don't understand how the criminal process works. The prosecution prepares the case after you have been charged with an offence not when you've been arrested! ! You need to take some time to understand the key time points in a prosecution.You don't know what the prosecution are doing and apart from that, this is exactly what reasonable judicial bodies do the world over. You are under arrest ON SUSPICION OF this or that. Into jail you go while we prepare a case for trial. Literally the process.
Putting this as gently as I can, people are queueing up to point out you are out of your depth in a puddle here. We get you're a Top G stan, I'm just saying it for you because you seem unwilling to.
Abdul Abulbul Amir said:
Sorry, you, and others, don't understand how the criminal process works. The prosecution prepares the case after you have been charged with an offence not when you've been arrested! ! You need to take some time to understand the key time points in a prosecution.
I think you're just confused about the Romanian legal system. Are you suggesting they are operating outside of their own rules, or is it that you just don't approve of their system? JQ said:
What's the difference between :
1. Someone being charged
2. A Judge reviewing all the evidence to date, receiving representations from the defendants lawyers, and then making a decision as to whether they should be detained?
Good question, hopefully we're getting somewhere.1. Someone being charged
2. A Judge reviewing all the evidence to date, receiving representations from the defendants lawyers, and then making a decision as to whether they should be detained?
The main difference is that he is formally accused of a crime.
1. We formally accuse you of such and such crime.
2. We think he committed a crime but we need a bit more time to decide if we are going to accuse him.
paulguitar said:
Abdul Abulbul Amir said:
Sorry, you, and others, don't understand how the criminal process works. The prosecution prepares the case after you have been charged with an offence not when you've been arrested! ! You need to take some time to understand the key time points in a prosecution.
I think you're just confused about the Romanian legal system. Are you suggesting they are operating outside of their own rules, or is it that you just don't approve of their system? Abdul Abulbul Amir said:
Sorry, you, and others, don't understand how the criminal process works. The prosecution prepares the case after you have been charged with an offence not when you've been arrested! ! You need to take some time to understand the key time points in a prosecution.
Yes, however in the period before you are charged, where these is sufficient suspicion that crimes have been committed and there is also credible suspicion that you remaining at liberty risks either actions to prejudice any investigation and trial or your fleeing to escape justice then it is allowable for you to be detained.That's exactly the situation here. There's nothing unfair about it unless you are alleging that the authorities are somehow deliberately extending the pre-charge detention period purely to somehow disadvantage AT and his brother. Is that what you are saying? What is you evidence fo that. I'm quite sure they will charge him as soon as possible. Given how shadowy and irregular his dealings seem to be its not surprising that is takes some time though.
How would you feel if they rushed charges and an ill prepared case failed through poor workup leading to him going free? Would that be justice for those who may have suffered through his activities?
Archie2050 said:
Abdul Abulbul Amir said:
Sorry, you, and others, don't understand how the criminal process works. The prosecution prepares the case after you have been charged with an offence not when you've been arrested! ! You need to take some time to understand the key time points in a prosecution.
Yes, however in the period before you are charged, where these is sufficient suspicion that crimes have been committed and there is also credible suspicion that you remaining at liberty risks either actions to prejudice any investigation and trial or your fleeing to escape justice then it is allowable for you to be detained.That's exactly the situation here. There's nothing unfair about it unless you are alleging that the authorities are somehow deliberately extending the pre-charge detention period purely to somehow disadvantage AT and his brother. Is that what you are saying? What is you evidence fo that. I'm quite sure they will charge him as soon as possible. Given how shadowy and irregular his dealings seem to be its not surprising that is takes some time though.
How would you feel if they rushed charges and an ill prepared case failed through poor workup leading to him going free? Would that be justice for those who may have suffered through his activities?
But how long should that process last and should the preparation of the case by the prosecution by completed in the period pre-charge or pre-trial?
My view is that three months is sufficiently long enough for them to gather enough evidence for them to charge him. I also have said that the period pre-charge shouldn't be the used by the prosecution to build their case...this should be done post-charge and pre-trial.
Edited by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Friday 3rd March 10:45
Abdul Abulbul Amir said:
paulguitar said:
Abdul Abulbul Amir said:
Sorry, you, and others, don't understand how the criminal process works. The prosecution prepares the case after you have been charged with an offence not when you've been arrested! ! You need to take some time to understand the key time points in a prosecution.
I think you're just confused about the Romanian legal system. Are you suggesting they are operating outside of their own rules, or is it that you just don't approve of their system? As has also been pointed out numerous times, Tate specifically went to live and 'work' in Romania because of their legal system, which he thought would favour him. He's looking more and more stupid as time goes on.
Gassing Station | The Lounge | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff