But the suspect allegations are the most important ones to justify her being put in prison for life - her being desensatised to violence when living in an active warzone, and also both sidesing (but not dismissing) are pretty flimsy by themselves. But when people (not just you) have positions that she should be getting life in prison, they have to treat the much more dubious allegations as fact.
Additionally, the logic that because the lesser accusaions probably happened the more serious ones did too is wrong - and this isn't how a fair judicial system would treat them. And yes, Begum's situation is not one conducive to providing a lot of credible evidence, but that doesn't then mean we treat the word of one activist as fact - we can only go off what truth can be established, and if that isnt there it doesn't mean lowering standards until we find something either
And yes, people are so willing to quickly believe these reports, despite their credibility being questioned massively, speaks to their existing prejudices
Not once have I entertained the notion of her being imprisoned for life, and have disagreed with anyone pushing that view point. I understand you're not solely aiming at me, but it's not really relevant when we're talking about the court of public opinion either. We're not in court, so things that can be used as evidence in a discussion, if they are to some reasonable extent useable, shouldn't be dismissed because they don't agree with your view.
Well... Not to be blunt about it, but patterns of behaviour are often used in dealing with sexual assault cases. We often infer whether someone -may- have done something based on lesser crimes. It doesn't prove anything, but it certainly lends credence to the idea that it may have happened so makes it worthy of further investigation.
I'd like to point out in my original post in this thread, that I actually suggested that she be put on trial, and believed life imprisonment wasn't the answer. I do believe she should undergo deradicalisation (of which there is undeniable evidence that she is deeply radicalised), mental health support and possible confinement until she is deemed fit to return to society. So I'm not exactly sure why we're even discussing life imprisonment, as I don't actually think anyone in -this- thread has called for it, and the previous thread has already been pointed out by myself, and many others, as a shit show.
My point about white washing is that in the previous thread, posters and in this thread, seemingly you, have refused to actually even state that she has done anything wrong. Do you believe she has? Or is she solely a victim?
The goal posts have moved with the source issue. Initially, it was just "Torygraph and Mail reported it so it's bull" then when I actually supplied the information about the quoted source, it's now that he is just a single activist, that's only been quoted by them, so it's still probably bull. I've went and browsed his social media, he's been quoted by at least 4 other papers other than Mail and Telegraph, has an organisation showing work in Syria, legitimate website, and he actually lived in Raqqa and escaped during IS rule... Given the nature of the situation, that's about as best a source as you will get... I still haven't had any real answer as to -why- he'd choose to make up false statements about Shamima? It's based on that information, alongside her own interviews, statements and the circumstances she was in. If you think that is "existing prejudice" then you do you, it isn't any skin of my back, but it'll certainly make me less inclined to view you seriously.
They wouldn't be called as a witness. They didn't exactly witness anything. Maybe as an expert witness but that's a stretch.
The point is less about simulating a court room but pointing out that someone should not be locked for life on such evidence.
He claimed she was well known in Raqqa, a place he lived in during the period she would have been there as a member of ISIS. It is possible he witnessed things himself or was aware of her personally. So yes, he could actually be called as witness in that sense.
And again, I'm not even sure why life imprisonment is even being bandied around in this thread... I've not seen a -SINGLE- poster advocate for that in this thread, in fact, the vast majority seem to be pretty much of the thought that she was a victim that remains accountable.
Most of the dicussion seems to be centering on what she should be held accountable for, and whether there is anything to actually be prosecuted for.
en.wikipedia.org
www.unicef.org
