Beg to differ. Due to some problem, the men began losing their hair, looking unsightly. This was a way to hide the baldness.

That's so misguided

@Scarface you know how many years it takes and how hard it is to get to that point?

Why not wear a mask? Plus im sure everyone know who the judge is

There are no British courts!

@@keithmuir5077 there are british courts. british refers to the british isles, or just great britian, which there are courts, that, because they are on those isles, are british.

The court of england and Wales and then the court of Scotland and the court of Northern Ireland so there really is no British court

@@blackfalcon1324 there is no British law which is what you by your statement are trying to claim there is only English and Scottish law

@@keithmuir5077 I know, I was being cheeky. An English court is a British court, a Scottish court is a British court. Yes I know they are different but they are both ‘British’

Totally agree, but then this is KZfaq, we can't expect much by way of mature reasoning.

Chad Thompson​​​​ Better looking like a classroom full of clowns than actually being a classroom full of clowns like your legal system, buddy. As I explained, we have far less miscarriages of justice than you do, maybe it's the wigs? Who gives a shit. Would you not have an operation by a heart surgeon because he was wearing a pink sweater? Stupid logic.

The Barn Owl Don't feed the attention-seeking baby Barn Owl.

Lmao triggered over someone making fun of a wig.

I'm going to focus on the wig.

+Dave SR there is no British legal system the law is separate between England and Scotland.

+Keith Muir and NI !

The victim never gets a second chance at life. Why should the killer?

I have a feeling that his continued refusal to disclose the location of the body will, eventually, count against him and the parole board may deny him release on that basis alone. They have that discretion, they have the final say, and they are totally independent of the police and the courts.

we also had the 3 strike law ! it was abolished by liberal pussys ! it was thus , get convicted of three indictable offences - then automatic life sentence they should also bring back the hibitual burgler sentence which was repeated house breakers and theives were declared by the court as felons and imprisoned at the house of corrections with hard labour for a minumum 5 years to a maxmium of 10 years! once again liberal pussys aboished this and the felon status

Then they should stop dressing so funny!

I am British "Don't disrespect the British judicial system!" the sentences that are given out are a joke 18 years for a life in a cushy cell with tv movie night with popcorn once a week in the main hall celebrity chefs designing the food, women prisons with swimming pools, list goes on and on..they look silly when they give out silly sentences, there is a lot of scum on the streets.

I'm British and it look stupid ! If they gave proper sentences then maby people would respect them

Robbie Aikman I totally agree but I also think wearing a graduation gown (I presume that's what he is wearing) is quite offensive. Traditional black robes and wig only. This just came across IMO as showing a flippant lack of respect for the seriousness and nature of the court system and the responsibility of representation to the public.

+Robbie Aikman I mean... this video is HILARIOUS

This is a scottish court not an english court

Last i checked i was born on the continent of North America under the jurisdiction of The United States of America. My ancestors many generations ago may have been immigrants but that does not make me an immigrant. Using your logic not even the ethnic group known as Native Americans are truly native since at one point in the distant history of humanity we had our humble beginnings in Africa and over thousands of years gradually migrated out of that region. Native Americans came to the Americas from Asia via the Bering Strait between Russia and Alaska when it was still a land bridge. Edit: I apologize in advance as your post is 4 months old and you likely forgot about it. I admire the pride you have in your country and your commitment to the preservation of your culture and customs however your branding of anyone that is not within the ethnic group of Native Americans as immigrants is factually incorrect.

Adam Higgins ye because most of our traditions don’t relate back to death

Is your comma key stuck on Ant?

Rehnquist attempted some theatre

Jo hamy washroom dey rahie namaz quraan rozze ateqaf m ghr m khana kahtey waqt un sabh ko balu ko nechur rahie hain pakistanni purrii dunniya him tafh m sagier ehmad rukhsana alhi harmainkhan nazish safiyaa sehriesh kanwal beniesh kanwal farhan ehmaad uzaier ehmad waqas ehmaad talhaa ehmaad 7 behehanbahyon ko dii un sabh hamad mahnoor anni ko utaa uttar uttar uttar uttar uttar uttar uttar uttar uttar uttar uttar uttar uttar etar etar etar etar etar etar etar etar etar etar etar etar etar etar duniya ki sanh betton ko kutty m kar unko unkki zaat m ketar ketar ketar ketar ketar ketar ketar ketar ketar ketar ketar ketar ketar ketar ketar dii

Absolutely agree it’s deserved. He has tortured Suzanne’s family and friends ever since he murdered her by not letting them know where she is. Her parents died never knowing where their much loved daughter was. They were never able to bring her home. He has tried to dehumanise her, make her lose her identity. Murder just wasn’t enough for this piece of……work. That to me says everything you’d ever need to know about him. Evil creep.

@@ElGibby and that's why he may not get parole when his time comes

What it sounds like

No other reason than tradition

MrJCKID201 our system is hundreds of years older and yours came from it so respect the tradition

Would never be allowed to state his opinion he probably writes these In his private home notes

@@thedrummerboy1215 If youre going to play the silly game of trying to act smart on a comment made 11 years ago, make sure you have the right info & know the difference between court & courtroom. Also to say to me it IS singulur when you have no idea of the amount of Cameras that is in the COURTROOM from this 1 clip is just foolish. Also the Hague has no credibility considering the fact Blair, Bush and others got away with lies and murder.

Probably because he gave him life.

Life with a minimum of 18 years that is called the punishment part after that is for the parole board and them alone to decide what happens believe reviews are every 2 years after punishment part expires

You misunderstand the sentence. Other people have explained this now so if you look through the comments it will be made clear to you

there is no British law they are separate jurisdictions you numpty

I believe it is because judges are supposed to be anonymous. The wigs and robes also represent the power of the Crown in the court and not the individual person.

No, life means life. But under UK law if a Life Sentence is ordered they are required to impose what's referred to as a 'Tariff', a Minimum Sentence. The minimum time they must spend in prison before they can be considered for parole. The only exception to this is a Whole Life Order where, as the name suggests, they spend their whole life in prison.

Also worth noting that, even after release, a convicted murderer is released 'on licence' for life. This imposes conditions and restrictions on the offender, which include place of residence, regular reporting to authorities, employment restrictions etc. The offender on licence can be recalled to prison at any time should he or she commit an offence or break any of the conditions. Sentencing policy is complicated (as is to be expected) and the judge has to follow the legislation. If you are interested in the detail, here's a link to the Crown Prosecution Service which deals with 'Mandatory life sentence in Murder cases'. It's a fairly long read, but it is the most reliable source of information. www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/sentencing-mandatory-life-sentences-murder-cases

@@robinholland1136 That makes more sense. Here in the US it varies by state, but life imprisonment can either mean life without parole (you will never ever be released unless the governor commutes your sentence) or indeterminate life, meaning that after a period of years you're eligible for parole, but the parole board has the option of never releasing you and keeping you locked up for the rest of your life.

@@alexcentury2166 Thank you for that. All things considered, there are more similarities in sentencing policy than I imagined. In England and Wales, we have the 'whole life tariff', which seems similar to 'life without parole' and which is applied to murder which fulfils certain conditions. Currently, there are believed to be around 75 prisoners in the UK who are subject to a whole life tariff. In other cases, once the minimum tariff has been served, the parole board will review the case and the offender and has the power to recommend the prisoner's release on licence, if certain criteria are met. To the lay person, I admit that it is sometimes difficult to reconcile the requirements of the law and their feelings that 'natural justice' should be served. But then, 'law' and 'justice' are not, necessarily, completely synonymous . . .

@@robinholland1136 In the States we hand out life without parole sentences like candy. That's why we incarcerate more people than any other country in the world. In my state unless you're under 18 (and even then it's not a guarantee) first degree murder (premeditated) is an automatic life without parole sentence. In the 1980s amid the panic over drugs we started handing out life without parole sentences just for simple possession of crack cocaine, and even for lower level offenses like burglary you'd get 5 years here when across the pond you'd get 5 months.

@atrollerinoblox4681, we didn't take over the 13 colonies, the 13 colonies were British!. You Americans rebelled because it was costing the British tax payer so much to protect you from Spanish or French attack, that we had to raise your taxes, which the colonies didn't like.

Aamir Ali you clearly are a prick if u don’t understand the legal system so should shut ur mouth. Asshole

You wouldn’t have known hadn’t it been for the theatre

He's a lord. A lord justice of the court. Sounds pretty important, so the attire he wears is completely appropriate to that role. A crown court judge with a lordship is a lot more important than the majority of people, so this whole "more important than he actually is" is complete rubbish.

I wouldn't call life a minor sentence

The judicial periwigs symbolise anonymity, ergo it is the court that passes sentence, not the individual. Also, formal traditional dress in courts, combined with the Crown's crest makes a British court a foreboding place where it is not advised to misbehave. US courts regularly have courtroom trouble. The gowns symbolise judicial authority granted to the judge by the monarch, after all it is the Crown (hence Crown Prosecution Service and Crown Prosecutor) that prosecutes in the UK, whereas in the US it is the state.

The judicial periwigs symbolise anonymity, ergo it is the court that passes sentence, not the individual. Also, formal traditional dress in courts, combined with the Crown's crest makes a British court a foreboding place where it is not advised to misbehave. US courts regularly have courtroom trouble. The gowns symbolise judicial authority granted to the judge by the monarch, after all it is the Crown (hence Crown Prosecution Service and Crown Prosecutor) that prosecutes in the UK, whereas in the US it is the state.

The judicial periwigs symbolise anonymity, ergo it is the court that passes sentence, not the individual. Also, formal traditional dress in courts, combined with the Crown's crest makes a British court a foreboding place where it is not advised to misbehave. US courts regularly have courtroom trouble. The gowns symbolise judicial authority granted to the judge by the monarch, after all it is the Crown (hence Crown Prosecution Service and Crown Prosecutor) that prosecutes in the UK, whereas in the US it is the state.

No you dummy

The court is not about morality. It's about law and facts, cold and hard.

IT'S STYLISH.

level fab this is how you do that shit :D

That's swag homie.

Do you realise how utterly uneducated your response is mate? Our judiciary here in the UK is the finest, we demarcate our judges, so it's not just some random person with a suit. The traditional outfit adds an element of seriousness and maturity. If you don't know the history, kindly piss off!

Ok, so Scotland has a mandatory life sentence for murder. However, that sentence isn't necessarily all in custody. You could be released on life licence at some stage. This means that you'll be tagged and if you commitany further offences or breach bail conditions you could be returned to jail, until you die. The "punishment part" serves 2 purposes. Firstly, it defines the minimum time that you must spend in jail before being eligible for release. Please note, there is no automatic release after the punishment part expires, it simply allows you to apply. Secondly, a prisoner on a life sentence appealed his sentence on the basis that not knowing if he'd ever be released was a "cruel and unusual punishment", which breaches international law. By stating a punishment part a prisoner will always have a 'review date', circumventing this issue.

​@@HunsAreGoingBust Thank you for kind explanation, sadly (because of my brain injury?) I'm still very confused: loss of liberty is in itself a massive punishment; then add on (not necessary & could be prevented) the hell of living too close to others with lots of noise & no privacy or choices of how spend time or who with plus not being able to eat what want/need at times & in manner need/want & no daily seeing/communication with children/family are each in themselves very cruel & unusual punishments = on top of loss of liberty & freedom to roam. I think the compound effects of all these different punishments *& so many more than I mention here) are far greater than the sum of their parts & must multiply the damaging effects & must cause serious mental health issues (on top of too many already have, plus brain injury) and self-harm suicide = because it is all so extremely unbearable. And I bet 'reviews' for parole/licence etc are very biased (everybody is, nobody & nothing can be completely impartial) & favour certain people/groups therefore 'justice' cannot be said to be fair or to have been achieved = ever. I won't start on about miscarriages of justice here... No confidence in the irrational system that's based on guesses of supposed 'probability of risk/s' which may be completely wrong... & so on. Thanks. Edit: added just after I'd put this up: 'The punishment part' sounds so silly, this must be a joke?! If prisoner is kept in longer than 'the punishment part' then what's other extra bit of (possible - but no clear binding Rules, random but biased?) incarceration (& all the horrors that come with this)? The FUN part, or what?

@@jennyhughes4474 You may have a point about detention being a CAU punishment. I'm not aware of anyone challenging that in the courts tho.

​@@HunsAreGoingBust I really wish somebody would: it's so very obvious that it is - & as I said even worse for people with brain injury, autism (extra-sensitive to noise, movement & son on) & those with mental health probs - & this MUST cause paranoia & suicidal thoughts/actions = only way to escape the extreme torture - I bet I would coz it'd be SO unbearable - but they try to stop people from being able to do that: caught in hell, makes me tearful & my breathing get worse with anxiety/stress only thinking about it - & there are loads of people (especially who get caught up in criminal justice system = often coz have been beaten around the head = brain damage (but IF diagnosed: most often as 'mental health probs'), I'm sure. Extreme torture for all but obviously affects some (the most vulnerable/ill/disabled/injured) far worse than others. Inhuman/e, very degrading & complete loss of dignity - I think, must be, is. Best to you.

I doubt it. Murder is an offence under the Crimes Act in my jurisdiction, and I'd be surprised if it wasn't in yours.

Tommy Robinson, or Stephen Yaxley-Lennon to use his actual name, is a criminal. Nothing more. There were court ordered reporting restrictions in place at the time for that trial so that the media would not unduly influence court proceedings. This protects the right to a fair trial. The moron deliberately broke those restrictions which could have caused a mis-trial and cost the victims their justice. All he had to do was wait until the end of the case when the court lifts the restrictions and he would have been fine.