quote:

---

The charges then fall under the children's Act I assume.

---

quote:

---

I don’t know the children’s Act, sorry.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bodwick

I see where your coming from with the “Not On Normal Communal Exercise” meaning, however I’m old school and won’t accept your meaning as it’s far too PC and gives the impression that it’s just another term for going on Rule 43.

I think my explanation is older and generally accepted as you say, as a prison term. Around since the days of Brady and used for crimes that make no sense compared to normal crime i.e. nonsense. Times change as do meanings but this one sticks…

I doubt you get segregated in Gambia more like sharing a small cell with many people. I know it’s hard on Janjangbureh and it’s goto be 20x worse than any in the UK. I won’t be dropping him off any soap that’s for sure.


I don’t know the children’s Act, sorry.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Formby

quote:

---

Originally posted by turk

this is not exactly copy of the children's act, but it is very similar.


Children act 2005. There are also Islamic law in Gambia that relates the children if your marriage is under islam. You need to refer Maliki law, Quran and Sunnah for as well. But this one is the civil law.

http://www.up.ac.za/dspace/bitstream/2263/1159/1/saine_m_1.pdf

---

This is too irrelevant for words. Hiz has already eastsblished by the links she posted that thet girl was not married under the local clause that can circumnavigate the age of consent. Therefore, any acts committed against this girl, EVEN THE TAKING OF PHOTOGRAPHS, renders the accused guilty.
The more I hear about this, the more I think of that poor 15 year old child getting battered in the head by the weight of assumption. I've half a mind to refer it to Amnesty.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by turk

hz

quote:

---

The charges then fall under the children's Act I assume.

---

bodwiki

quote:

---

I don’t know the children’s Act, sorry.

---

turk was trying to be helpful these folks.

Formby

I do have a 1 year old baby. I realize what the sexual crime against children is. However, that is itself not a reason to lynch someone. I don't want to be emotional as being emotional in justice only results unfair judgement. I believe in Justice. As we don't have the facts/evidences we can only speculate. Let me repeat. Everyone is innocent until proven guilty. I am choosing not to be overly emotional on this case. I would want keep my cool and decide based on facts/evidences. You sound like you have seen all the facts, evidences and read all the testimonies. To be honest, also I don't have much confidence in justice system in Gambia as they are lacking technology as well. This guy maybe guilty of taking photograph but he may be innocent from the rape. So his punishement must be for his crime not any less not any more.

I also do not appreciate your questioning me like "do you not have children, do you not understand anything about the adult responsibility" which is simply BS.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by turk

formby

No, not at all, you could have got credit for it until you made this ridiculous BS comments. Law is formal and rational based on that, I make my decisions with disregard for my own emotions, of the feelings of victim, or bantaba. Especially your questioning me sounded like a priest from inquisition. My being sceptic does not mean "I do not have children or have sympaty for children or understand anything about the adult responsibilities" which sounded like you, a mob, advocating extrajudicial punishment.

---