|| And from today's Completely Fucking Ludicrous ™ files
||Aug. 12th, 2004 10:43 am|
Appeal court judges yesterday defied human rights campaigners by ruling that British courts could use evidence extracted under torture, as long as British agents were not complicit in the abuse. |
Nyees. Obviously going by the principle that we shouldn't encourage our own to engage in torture (although sidestepping the allegations that we *have*) but it's not our responsibility it someone else does it. But ignoring the fact that such evidence is *completely fucking useless*.
It's extremely suspicious that the judges (well, the same one in fact, Mr Justice Laws) stated that the evidence being extracted under torture was "purely hypothetical" but then went on to back the use of evidence gained by torture. You'd've thunk that if it wasn't extracted under torture there would be no need to defend it further...
The majority decision was welcomed by the home secretary, David Blunkett.
Gareth Peirce, solicitor for eight of the men, said: “This is a terrifying judgment. It shows we have completely lost our way in this country, morally and legally.”
Perhaps we need to train some guide-dogs who can offer replacement moral and legal sight too.