 |
|
| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
Prince
507 Posts |
 Posted - 17 Aug 2010 : 01:42:16
|
Why isn't the magistrate ordering the immediate deportation of this guy? Even if he were taking the pictures of adults, if it very evident that he was engaged in criminal behavior involving moral turpitude.
http://thepoint.gm/africa/gambia/article/german-national-convicted
Peter Edenhard a 54-year-old German national was on Tuesday convicted and sentenced to a fine of D10, 000, in default to serve six months in prison, after pleading guilty to the offence of trafficking in obscene material.
In his plea of mitigation, the convicted person, Peter Edenhard, told the court that he is a first-time offender and that he has been residing in The Gambia for the past six years without any problems.
|
"When injustice becomes law, rebellion becomes duty." |
|
|
kayjatta
2978 Posts |
Posted - 17 Aug 2010 : 07:42:01
|
"Magistrate Mbacke further stated that the convict derived pleasure when taking such photographs and when looking at them. He added that this act is not in conformity with the norms and values of any decent society, and is foreign to this country."
Deriving pleasure when taking the photographs and by looking at them, as stated in the above statement of the learned magistrate does not constitute traficking and perhaps cannot be a felony. If this is the case deportation is unreasobale.
Also I do not know why this guy would agree to plead guilty to trafficking instead of personal use.
I do not also know why the girls who appear to be active willing participants (unless they are minors) not charged and prosecuted as well.
Disclosure: Kayjatta does not have all the facts of this case. There he is not disproving or approving any position taken in this matter. |
Edited by - kayjatta on 17 Aug 2010 07:43:17 |
 |
|
|
toubab1020
12314 Posts |
Posted - 17 Aug 2010 : 20:31:44
|
KAY,"Disclosure: Kayjatta does not have all the facts of this case. There he is not disproving or approving any position taken in this matter." NOT an Att. Eh ?
I do agree with you though,but lets face it I think that there MAYBE a feeling of "plead to this and it will be OK a fine nothing else " the defendant is more or less a resident and he should have known better than to take the action that he did, bearing in mind that Gambian men hold moral standards in high regard because of their beliefs.
"I do not also know why the girls who appear to be active willing participants (unless they are minors) not charged and prosecuted as well."
Such prosecution would not look good for Gambian womanhood,assuming that the girls were Gambian it would also bring great shame on their families,Gambia is a small place.
What happens in other developed areas of The Gambia, where "the big bosses live" is not talked about.
|
"Simple is good" & I strongly dislike politics. You cannot defend the indefensible.
|
Edited by - toubab1020 on 17 Aug 2010 22:34:09 |
|
|
|
Prince
507 Posts |
Posted - 18 Aug 2010 : 01:05:51
|
Kay, I do not know a lot about the law. But based on the point's report; it is very clear that the man was not convicted for deriving pleasure from pictures taken for personal consumption. He was convicted for trafficking obscene materials. The pleasure he derived from his morally bankrupt action was considered in handing down the lenient sentence.
The girls, assuming they're adults, cannot be convicted because they were not caught trafficking obscene materials.
Most decent countries, the United States included, makes immigrants inadmissible after they're convicted of crimes involving moral turpitudehttp://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/moral turpitude
I may have misunderstood the whole case as I often do whenever I try to understand the words of our learned legal folks. |
"When injustice becomes law, rebellion becomes duty." |
|
|
|
kayjatta
2978 Posts |
Posted - 18 Aug 2010 : 07:34:31
|
"The trial magistrate, Abdoulie Mbacke of the Bundung Magistrates' Court, in passing sentence stated that the convict deserves some punishment to serve as a deterrent.
He stressed that the offence is an immoral act and is unpardonable. He said the commission of such act by an elderly person is unacceptable, adding that the court has no doubt that the convict used to undress the two young girls and expose their private parts naked in many ways, as shown in the pictures.
Magistrate Mbacke further stated that the convict derived pleasure when taking such photographs and when looking at them. He added that this act is not in conformity with the norms and values of any decent society, and is foreign to this country. "
This statement above is what the learned Magistrate is quoted by the POINT newspaper to have said. There are two relevant points there that supports the Margistrate's conclusion. Please see those points highlighted in bold. None of them supports the trafficking conviction.
Two things; either the Magistrate erred in points of law or the POINT newspaper did a poor reporting of the Magistrates remarks at sentencing.
However, plea deals can be tricky; and like Toubab said the pressure to settle can lead some defendants to make wrong decisions. I have seen many "good men" who found themselves in sticky situations and in a panic to make the bad and embarrassing situation go away, they have settled for something that comes to haunt them later...
Caveat: Kayjatta is not an attorney, and has no legal qualifications whatsoever. Everything he says is mere personal opinion. |
Edited by - kayjatta on 18 Aug 2010 07:38:52 |
|
|
|
kayjatta
2978 Posts |
Posted - 18 Aug 2010 : 09:21:45
|
quote:
Originally posted by Prince
Kay, I do not know a lot about the law. But based on the point's report; it is very clear that the man was not convicted for deriving pleasure from pictures taken for personal consumption. He was convicted for trafficking obscene materials. The pleasure he derived from his morally bankrupt action was considered in handing down the lenient sentence.
The girls, assuming they're adults, cannot be convicted because they were not caught trafficking obscene materials.
Most decent countries, the United States included, makes immigrants inadmissible after they're convicted of crimes involving moral turpitudehttp://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/moral turpitude
I may have misunderstood the whole case as I often do whenever I try to understand the words of our learned legal folks.
Deportation is different from "inadmissible". Deportation is eclusively for felonies, and even some felonies there are instances where deportation is put on hold... |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
| Bantaba in Cyberspace |
© 2005-2024 Nijii |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
