Shemima Begum

GrannyGravy, I hate to comment, but either you have stopped writing in understandable sentences, or my comprehension has gone down to zero.

If she comes back she will be make a lot of money selling her story. She was a stupid 15 year old out for adventure, she knew it was wrong. Nothing for her where she is so it’s sunk in what a mess she’s made, she’s sorry for herself and will say what she has go to get back here. I don’t think I would trust her, yet I know many others have done the same and come back and lots of fifteen year olds mess up big time. Should she come back I don’t think she should profit for what she’s done.

PippaZ

GrannyGravy, I hate to comment, but either you have stopped writing in understandable sentences, or my comprehension has gone down to zero.

No idea, I do know that Ms.Begum and her situation is like a tinder box waiting to explode, which is why folks have strong and differing opinions.

I really feel for all those victims of Daesh and their families (our AC has been deployed in Iraq, Iran and other hot spots ) I understand those who want Ms.Begum to rot where she is , but my logical head tells me that this is wrong and that she should be given a chance to put her side to a jury. I, you and probably all of GN have no idea what the intelligence services know/have evidence of. It’s a dichotomy, Ms.Begum’s rights versus the safety of 66+million U.K. citizens?

In my opinion if/when she is free in the U.K., she will need a new identity, 24/7 surveillance (for her protection) her life will never be normal by everyday standards. She may never find happiness or peace as we know it, another life ruined by Daesh and their evil ideologies.

Oops *Afghanistan not Iran (flipping iPhone)

Allsorts

If she comes back she will be make a lot of money selling her story. She was a stupid 15 year old out for adventure, she knew it was wrong. Nothing for her where she is so it’s sunk in what a mess she’s made, she’s sorry for herself and will say what she has go to get back here. I don’t think I would trust her, yet I know many others have done the same and come back and lots of fifteen year olds mess up big time. Should she come back I don’t think she should profit for what she’s done.

If she is found not guilty of whatever charges can be brought against her she may be able to make money. If she is found guilty she will not, in law, be able to profit from her crime.

So what can she be charged with? What did she do here?

GrannyGravy13

PippazZ the shouty ones

Who are the shouty ones are the posters who disagree with you?

I would say so Grannygravy I dont agree with with what Pippa posted, but her opinions are her pererogative. I dont think SB should be allowed back in Great Britain, I am merely stating this and not shouting.
I did find that statement a bit patronising and the post comes across that she doing what she is accusing others of.

rafichagran

GrannyGravy13

PippazZ the shouty ones

Who are the shouty ones are the posters who disagree with you?

I would say so Grannygravy I dont agree with with what Pippa posted, but her opinions are her pererogative. I dont think SB should be allowed back in Great Britain, I am merely stating this and not shouting.
I did find that statement a bit patronising and the post comes across that she doing what she is accusing others of.

I can see you are not shouting rafichagran and you say it is just your opinion.

So, what would your answer be to Mollygo's question? What has she done? And mine "what law has she broken?"

I have to presume those who don't feel she should be allowed to come home, regardless of the law, favour the court of public opinion as judge and jury. I find that extremely dangerous and the reason why we base our democracy on the law in the first place.

Shemima did break a law. The year before she left, Home Secretary Theresa May had exercised powers under Section 3 of the Terrorism Act 2000, to make Isis a proscribed organisation.

Having anything to do with the group was punishable by up to 10 years in prison or a fine. This has not been argued in court so we do not know where she would fall on this scale. They would have to take into account her age, her understanding and any coercive control involved.

However, when Shemima Begum left the UK police said she had committed no offences and would not be treated as a terrorist. This too would have to be taken into account.

All we know for sure is that aged 15, she married a 23-year-old Dutch convert in a ceremony that would not be recognised as legal in Dutch or British law. Whether this act, in itself breaks British law is dubious. Again, if is to be used against her it needs to be tested in court.

As far as I can see all other suggestions of what she did or didn't do are unsubstantiated.

There is also a lengthy argument to say that the government broke International law by making Shemima stateless. That also needs to be tried in court.

Shamima was born in England. She was radicalised here, and failed by our police and government. She is our responsibility.

Shamima was interviewed by counter-terrorism police - because a friend had joined Isis - without her parents being told. She was not referred to the "Prevent" anti-terror scheme. Both these acts were unlawful.

According to what the government told Parliament when she left for Syria it took 2 days for the Foreign Office to warn the Turkish government, by way of an overnight email. It was 3 days before police arranged a BBC appeal, and 4 for the information to be given to Interpol.

As a child, and as a victim of international trafficking, grooming, and forced marriage. Shamima should have been protected by international law, the United Nations, and the UK government.

In legislation Shamima is a victim of child abuse, has a right to lifelong anonymity, and whoever trafficked or forced her into marriage overseas can be tried and jailed in the UK.

Whatever the outcome we all deserve to the trial in a proper court of law. Not in the media or on Gransnet by those whose opinion can never, for the sake of us all, be counted as law.

Saying she didn't know what ISIS was like goes against her claim she was "groomed" by the various websites, some of which would show the atrocities. These websites would not be easy to find so why did she seek them out? If she had questions why not discuss them with her local Imam, parents or other adults?

I have no doubt she knew exactly what ISIS was about and is still a supporter who, if allowed back, will attempt to indoctrinate other young people.

PippaZ Thanks for your comprehensive post.
Oldwoman70 It is very easy to find things on the net and once you have found one it is easy to find many. Teenage girls are especially vulnerable to religious and spiritual propaganda. The Catholic church used to recruit teenagers as nuns.
Part of grooming is to make sure the victim never confides in other adults.

Oldwoman70

Saying she didn't know what ISIS was like goes against her claim she was "groomed" by the various websites, some of which would show the atrocities. These websites would not be easy to find so why did she seek them out? If she had questions why not discuss them with her local Imam, parents or other adults?

I have no doubt she knew exactly what ISIS was about and is still a supporter who, if allowed back, will attempt to indoctrinate other young people.

You are not a lawyer or a judge. You have not seen the evidence properly presented. You (and I) are not in a position to decide. Whether you "think" Shemima Begum "knew about Isis" or not is irrelevant. She should not lose her human rights to be tried by a court of law whatever all the Oldwoman70s of this country think. The general public is not "fit and proper" to decide your future, my future or Shemima Begum's future concerning a legal issue. She needs to be brought back and allowed to put her case. Whether she wins or not should be decided by that law and not by the likes of you and me on Gransnet.

PippaZ this thread is becoming a good illustration of why Ms. Begum should be brought to trial in a neutral Country. I doubt very much if it would be possible to find a truly impartial jury here in the U.K.

GrannyGravy13

PippaZ this thread is becoming a good illustration of why Ms. Begum should be brought to trial in a neutral Country. I doubt very much if it would be possible to find a truly impartial jury here in the U.K.

Good point GG13.
I’m still not sure what she can be tried for. Whatever she did was not a crime in the country where she was.

She was radicalised here, and failed by our police and government

I think that’s one of the most ridiculous statements I’ve read on this forum.

It’s typical of certain elements of UK society to constantly shift blame. First and foremost, if anyone failed this woman it was her family. and the culture SHE was brought up in. Instead of blaming the government and the police, maybe stop prohibiting them from doing their jobs. If they weren’t so shackled by the ones screaming racism and human rights abuses they could probably have put a stop to a lot of this so called grooming.

Mollygo

GrannyGravy13

PippaZ this thread is becoming a good illustration of why Ms. Begum should be brought to trial in a neutral Country. I doubt very much if it would be possible to find a truly impartial jury here in the U.K.

Good point GG13.
I’m still not sure what she can be tried for. Whatever she did was not a crime in the country where she was.

Although I see what you are saying GrannyGravy I can't see how it would work. Even if it were in another country, it would have to be under UK law. It would also have to be with a jury of her "peers".

It is then for the lawyers to put forward their case and the Judge to direct the jury to reach their judgement on only what they have heard.

If such a trial can't be facilitated here, how could it be done just by taking it to another country?

I think a prosecutor can apply to have a trial without a jury. It is then decided by a Judge or Judges (not too sure on this point). However, such a judgement could well be unacceptable to the very people and views you referred to.

Mollygo as I wrote before:

Shemima did break a law. The year before she left, Home Secretary Theresa May had exercised powers under Section 3 of the Terrorism Act 2000, to make Isis a proscribed organisation.

Having anything to do with the group was punishable by up to 10 years in prison or a fine. This has not been argued in court so we do not know where she would fall on this scale. They would have to take into account her age, her understanding and any coercive control involved.

If there is any other evidence, rather than hearsay, that she did anything else that would come up too. But so far not one has offered any charge against her. The government just broke International Law to keep her out - that too might have to be taken into account.

tickingbird

^She was radicalised here, and failed by our police and government^

I think that’s one of the most ridiculous statements I’ve read on this forum.

It’s typical of certain elements of UK society to constantly shift blame. First and foremost, if anyone failed this woman it was her family. and the culture SHE was brought up in. Instead of blaming the government and the police, maybe stop prohibiting them from doing their jobs. If they weren’t so shackled by the ones screaming racism and human rights abuses they could probably have put a stop to a lot of this so called grooming.

I think there are some posts that, in the end, you just have to ignore.

PippaZ
I think there are some posts that, in the end, you just have to ignore
So why didn’t you??!

I don't know Shemima Begun, I know nothing about her family or her upbringing and how this relates to her culture. I don't know why she chose to go to Syria or actually what happened to her when she was there apart from the fact that at 15 she was married to a much older man, bore 4 children and had 3 of them die, had her husband die, that of the 2 friends that went with her, 1 is dead and the other is missing. I've seen her in the media dressed in the hijab and western clothes, I don't know which was her choice and which was the decision made by others. Basically we ALL know very little about what has happened to her and I believe it was wrong to take away her nationality and leave her stateless. Let her come back to the UK and face the consequences of her actions. FWIW those of you who conflate this standpoint with a lack of sympathy for all those innocent people who have suffered at the hands of ISIS are WRONG. The two things are completely separate.

Foxie48 Much in your post is wrong. She didn’t have 4 children and 3 die, therefore leaving 1 alive. I believe she had 3 but there’s debate over the third which she was holding when she was first interviewed. Although conditions over there aren’t ideal, no reason was given for these infant deaths. Her husband isn’t ‘a much older man’ either and he isn’t dead.

Her so called change of heart came about when she realised her story hadn’t gone down well over here. She is now dressed in western clothing, complete with make up. Her human rights lawyer tweeted “the boys are back in town” when The Taliban took over Kabul. Pretty obvious his allegiance isn’t to the UK but he makes a good living here. I’d like to know who is paying his fees as, surely if she is no longer a UK citizen, our government isn’t. As she quite obviously has people behind her, advising and supplying money, I’d like to know who they are and if they’re from any organisation.

As it stands I believe she’s a threat to the UK. After revisiting the horrors of 9/11 last week on the 20th anniversary I think the danger posed by such people needs to be taken very seriously. I back Sajid Javid on this and I hope he stands firm.

We need to be the bigger person by treating her correctly ensuring her human rights are maintained and that she is given a fair trial.

We aren’t ISIS or the Taliban.

We should know how to behave towards another human being.

Shemima Begum's former lawyer has been subjected to death threats and threats of violence since representing her, as well as a young man targeted by Tommy Robinson. I suppose being told his allegiance isn't to the UK is kind of like those judges being told they were the enemies of the people.

I see international affairs expert Ulrike Johnson has made deep and insightful comments about the situation. How lucky we are that the press ferrets out such important things on our behalf.

Whitewavemark2

We need to be the bigger person by treating her correctly ensuring her human rights are maintained and that she is given a fair trial.

We aren’t ISIS or the Taliban.

We should know how to behave towards another human being.

Exactly. I'm not sure just how much the law would be interested in whether her children died or not. People might take it into account because it is what she had to go through. After all, her radicalisation took place here. Added to that, the system here, which should have helped her, didn't act even though they knew the danger the child was in.

We have the rule of law, not the rule of the mob. Some of what we are reading on this thread sounds like the stirring up of a rabble. The law is what matters. If we allow our government to act outside the law, we weaken our position in the future and that of others who may be our family in future circumstances.

We have the rule of law, not the rule of the mob. Some of what we are reading on this thread sounds like the stirring up of a rabble. The law is what matters. If we allow our government to act outside the law, we weaken our position in the future and that of others who may be our family in future circumstances.

In that case you have no problem with the ruling by The Supreme Court then?

PippaZ

Oldwoman70

Saying she didn't know what ISIS was like goes against her claim she was "groomed" by the various websites, some of which would show the atrocities. These websites would not be easy to find so why did she seek them out? If she had questions why not discuss them with her local Imam, parents or other adults?

I have no doubt she knew exactly what ISIS was about and is still a supporter who, if allowed back, will attempt to indoctrinate other young people.

You are not a lawyer or a judge. You have not seen the evidence properly presented. You (and I) are not in a position to decide. Whether you "think" Shemima Begum "knew about Isis" or not is irrelevant. She should not lose her human rights to be tried by a court of law whatever all the Oldwoman70s of this country think. The general public is not "fit and proper" to decide your future, my future or Shemima Begum's future concerning a legal issue. She needs to be brought back and allowed to put her case. Whether she wins or not should be decided by that law and not by the likes of you and me on Gransnet.

I have an opinion and am as entitled to voice it as you or anyone else. Anyone who claims the Manchester bombing was "justified" has, in my opinion, not changed their mind about the organisation they joined

tickingbird my understanding is that the Supreme Court initially over ruled the govt, then changed on appeal of national security but SB can appeal that verdict and the current situation is one of being paused until a way can be found for her to represent her case. If the Supreme court over rules her appeal, then that will be that but I will still feel very uncomfortable about this particular situation. Anyone who works in schools or has contact with children will have undertaken Safeguarding training and will have some knowledge with regard to the "Prevent" programme. This programme recognises the extent to which vulnerable children can be groomed into terrorist organisations. In the future it might mean that any child groomed in this way is not seen as a victim but as a risk to national security and stripped of their nationality. I worry that this would be a step too far.