• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Hostage situation at a church near Rouen in northern France (Update: it's over)

Status
Not open for further replies.
I want to note that the whole "fight in a foreign army and loose your German citizenship" thing was heavily revises in 2011. Nowadays you can fight in the army of any NATO member and most democratic/western allies such as Sweden, Japan or South Korea without any issues, in the case of the NATO members you don't even need to inform the German authorities about it anymore. You would have to actually join the military of some dictatorship or Russia if you wanted to get rid of your citizenship now. So it's even less of a precedent for the citizenship-removal thing than some people might believe it to be.

Also gotta say that we got a serious wave of copycats here, bunch of domestic lone wolves going on the Jihad with very few attacks that were actually planned or co-ordinated by ISIS itself. It's also rather obvious that ISIS wants to destabilize the refugee situation now that it stopped making negative headlines (outside the UK that is) after the refugee flood was shut out by fences and the rather shameful deal with Erdogan.

IMO radicalization in prisons is one of the main causes and far too little is done to address it. There should be a moderate Muslim religious counsellor for every prison with even a handful of Muslim inmates.

I went to law school in 2005 so when the case of Murat Kurnaz was still being discussed. And the question was if there were legal grounds to revoke his citizenship if he indeed had joined the Taliban(of course there were not). Someone joing ISIS in Syria would be absolutely comparable as "vergleichbaren bewaffneten Verbänden eines ausländischen Staates" (comparable armed forces of a foreign country). But it isn't completely unfeasible. But it's a purely academic discussion not really a practical one.
 
I went to law school in 2005 so when the case of Murat Kurnaz was still being discussed. And the question was if there were legal grounds to revoke his citizenship if he indeed had joined the Taliban(of course there were not). Someone joing ISIS in Syria would be absolutely comparable as "vergleichbaren bewaffneten Verbänden eines ausländischen Staates" (comparable armed forces of a foreign country). But it isn't completely unfeasible. But it's a purely academic discussion not really a practical one.

How does Germany treat people going to Iraq and fighting ISIS with the peshmerga or something?
 
How does Germany treat people going to Iraq and fighting ISIS with the peshmerga or something?

Technically it would be the same, so you could revoke their citizenship(of course with the caveat not to create stateless people). Of course you would have to recognize the Peshmarga as a state or at least similar to a state. In case with the Taliban it was easy but with ISIS you would have to construct something like "staatsähnlich" (similar to a state) to make it work. But they do treat people fighting for the Kurds exactlly the same: No citizenships are being revoked.
 

nilbog21

Banned
Horrible crime. I know a few priests in France and they literally devote their lives to helping other people, regardless of age, sex, religion, etc.. I'm not religious at all, but these people are usually real life saints.

Looks like it's going to be Trump/Le Pen 2020 :(
 
People saying citizenship should be revoked when you do a crime. So much for justice and equality and liberal principles...

And the whole "integrate/assimilate or get the fuck out" fails to take into account the many instances we have of the society simply rejecting immigrants from the Middle East or Asia because of their name or skin color or way of speaking or institutional discrimination.

European countries are really racist towards a lot of these groups coupled with institutional failures, so of course it's gonna be hard to "do as the Romans do" when you are constantly marginalized and discriminated against in the media, in public, on the street, in school, at the job, and so forth.

People need to adopt a broader perspective and realize that "integrating" into a new society that constantly rejects and discriminates you is simply not possible or efficient.

Agreed.

I see we're going the old "we have no one but ourselves to blame" route.

*sigh*

Of course not, but at the very least it's something to take into account, don't you think?
 

Koren

Member
Should have been imprisoned for life.
Imprisoned for life for trying (and failing) to join Syria?

We will need to build a lot of prisons... Also, there's no such thing as "prison for life" in France, as far as I know.

Also, I want to think you can make a mistake and overcome it. Prison is not a place to definitively stow away all people that could be a threat.
 

Alx

Member
New official statements from the procureur :
The hostage who was very badly hurt should survive. He's 86 years old, tiens bon papy.
Both attackers had fake explosive belt/bomb made of tinfoil and cooking timer.
One attacker was identified, he was on house arrest for attempting to go to Syria twice. He was forbidden to leave the area, had to report weekly to the police station, and his ID/passport was confiscated.
Second attacker isn't identified yet.
A minor has been arrested, he's the younger brother of a man with an international search warrant for having been in Syria.
 

TM94

Member
Imprisoned for life for trying (and failing) to join Syria?

We will need to build a lot of prisons... Also, there's no such thing as "prison for life" in France, as far as I know.

Also, I want to think you can make a mistake and overcome it. Prison is not a place to definitively stow away all people that could be a threat.

Shouldn't have been on the streets.

End of.
 

Alx

Member
How? How was he let go? What the hell?

He was let go because he was only guilty of ignoring judge orders, not for committing a crime.
He first tried to go to Syria on March 2015, was caught at the border and forbidden to leave the country.
He tried again in May 2015, was caught again, and because of that offense had to spend 10 months in prison. He then went to house arrest, with weekly reports to the police station, confiscated ID and only being allowed to leave the house 4 hours a day. Which he followed, but it didn't prevent him from attacking people in the vicinity.
 
People saying citizenship should be revoked when you do a crime. So much for justice and equality and liberal principles...

And the whole "integrate/assimilate or get the fuck out" fails to take into account the many instances we have of the society simply rejecting immigrants from the Middle East or Asia because of their name or skin color or way of speaking or institutional discrimination.

European countries are really racist towards a lot of these groups coupled with institutional failures, so of course it's gonna be hard to "do as the Romans do" when you are constantly marginalized and discriminated against in the media, in public, on the street, in school, at the job, and so forth.

People need to adopt a broader perspective and realize that "integrating" into a new society that constantly rejects and discriminates you is simply not possible or efficient.

Integration is possible (many have done it) but what some people dont understand is that its a lot harder than it seems. Like you said, you cant easily do as the romans do when theres so much stacked against you.

I would be interested in hearing from Muslims that thrive in French and other European societies. It would be productive to learn what worked for them and what didnt and how those lessons can be applied for others.

It would also be good if those that feel discriminated came forward and explained their grievances as well. Cant do anything about that unless the issues are addressed. They might already be doing that but I dont really follow French or European day to day stuff.

He was let go because he was only guilty of ignoring judge orders, not for committing a crime.
He first tried to go to Syria on March 2015, was caught at the border and forbidden to leave the country.
He tried again in May 2015, was caught again, and because of that offense had to spend 10 months in prison. He then went to house arrest, with weekly reports to the police station, confiscated ID and only being allowed to leave the house 4 hours a day. Which he followed, but it didn't prevent him from attacking people in the vicinity.

Ah gotcha. Don't those ankle tags beep or signal authorities when the person leaves the vicinity or something? Or have I been watching too many movies.
 

Alx

Member
Ah gotcha. Don't those ankle tags beep or signal authorities when the person leaves the vicinity or something? Or have I been watching too many movies.

They do, but as mentioned he was still allowed to leave the house 4 hours a day (from 8:30 to 12:30), which is when he attacked the church. The arrest was meant to prevent him from going to Syria, and nothing else.
 
That's the whole point of them.

They do, but as mentioned he was still allowed to leave the house 4 hours a day (from 8:30 to 12:30), which is when he attacked the church. The arrest was meant to prevent him from going to Syria, and nothing else.

I get that but don't they keep track of where they're going and when? I just feel like the authorities dropped the ball regarding this guy.
 
I know in the UK we can't do it because prisons are underfunded and overcrowded as fuck. Reoffending is around 50% too, so our prison system is America-level bad in terms of effectiveness. Some Euro countries can do it, though. For example the Netherlands started closing prisons because crime was so low?
Well... the official reports of crime are getting lower and less people are sent to prison. But the police has recently warned that a lot of people are not filing charges anymore. Reports showed that right now for about 27% of crimes charges are filed. Ten years ago that was 35%. But that would mostly be for 'smaller' crimes, like things getting stolen, threats, vandalism, etc.

One of the attackers had already been jailed for terrorism, previously helped another person join ISIS, and was currently on house arrest at his parents' place with an ankle tag.
You'd think during a state of emergency and with recent terror attacks, people like this would be locked up again or at least their house arrest getting a lot tighter.
 

Kurtofan

Member
At this point I support a full overhaul of the justice system in this country, this is insane. These people have blood on their hands.
 

Oriel

Member
One attacker was identified, he was on house arrest for attempting to go to Syria twice. He was forbidden to leave the area, had to report weekly to the police station, and his ID/passport was confiscated.

He should have been incarcerated, simple as.
 

Alx

Member
I get that but don't they keep track of where they're going and when? I just feel like the authorities dropped the ball regarding this guy.

The investigation will tell, but even if you track his position in real time, what would his daily trajectory tell you ? There's nothing suspicious in walking around every day. There's no way you can tell if he's just enjoying a leisure walk or is on the way to kill someone.
In hindsight the only mistake that was made was to allow him those four hours a day... but then without those it's not a house arrest any more, but a full arrest.
 
Well... the official reports of crime are getting lower and less people are sent to prison. But the police has recently warned that a lot of people are not filing charges anymore. Reports showed that right now for about 27% of crimes charges are filed. Ten years ago that was 35%. But that would mostly be for 'smaller' crimes, like things getting stolen, threats, vandalism, etc.


You'd think during a state of emergency and with recent terror attacks, people like this would be locked up again or at least their house arrest getting a lot tighter.

That costs money. Lots of money. With austerity sweeping Europe you'd be hard pressed to find it.
 
The investigation will tell, but even if you track his position in real time, what would his daily trajectory tell you ? There's nothing suspicious in walking around every day. There's no way you can tell if he's just enjoying a leisure walk or is on the way to kill someone.
In hindsight the only mistake that was made was to allow him those four hours a day... but then without those it's not a house arrest any more, but a full arrest.

I guess if the church was within his daily route then its probably a lot harder to find anything to be alarmed about. But yeah I guess we can wait until the full investigation is over and see what the police say. France had another terrorist attack recently and in a state of emergency you'd think guys like this would be watched every step. I realize thats a lot easier to say in hindsight.
 
Are we really talking about imprisonating each people that tried once to reach Syria?

For life?
Considering the only reason right now for going to Syria is pretty much joining a war, I think it wouldn't be unreasonable to lock those people up until the conflict there is resolved.

If you have someone with the intent of joining a terrorist organisation, who actually makes moves to do that - he is buying a ticket to Turkey probably and has plans to cross the border - what should we do with them?

What about rehab? Arent European countries great at rehabbing prisoners and reintegrating them into society? Or is that only the Scandinavian countries?
I don't know how effective rehabilitation has been for things like this. This isn't your ordinary crime.
 
Are people seriously discussing pre-emptively imprisoning people without charge just because they might do something? It's a fantasy world you people are living in, the Western world is governed by laws, you know. This would pretty much be impossible to do without dismantling the whole legal framework. Guarding particularly risky people 24 hours a day, that is possible. The real problem was letting him have those 4 hours in a state of emergency.
 
Are people seriously discussing pre-emptively imprisoning people without charge just because they might do something? It's a fantasy world you people are living in, the Western world is governed by laws, you know. This would pretty much be impossible to do without dismantling the whole legal framework.
Intent to join a terrorist organisation is a crime if it can be proven here.
 
Intent to join a terrorist organisation is a crime if it can be proven here.

What's the maximum sentence for it? AFAIK the thing he was charged with was attempting entry to Syria. He then was jailed for it, then had his documents taken so he couldn't leave the country. Then was placed under curfew after release. Only way you could deal with him would be to charge him with something else, then put him in custody until trial.
 

CrunchyB

Member
What's the alternative? The entire population is held hostage right now.

There is no neat solution. Either you jail thousands of people for an indefinite period of time because of thought crimes, or you can try and make things work with house arrest and police monitoring.

You can't extradite European ISIS supporters because most are EU citizens.
 

Koren

Member
No we should just give them a tag and allow them to roam free. That should be enough.
You know, all of them aren't bad people. Of course, some of them are. Most, maybe.

Plently of people believe that 9/11 never happened and is a US government trick. That skytrails are poison dispersed in the atmosphere. That flu vaccines are mind-control devices for the gorvernment.

Some people actually have been made to believed (especially some years ago) that in Syria, good muslims were murdered because of their beliefs, and all what's said in the medias are propaganda. Some go to Syria, discover the truth, and run back, scared and horrified.

I don't know which percentage, but they exists.

I have issues with prison for life for people by principle for people that were wrong once.


Granted, we have to be really, really cautious with those, obviously. They may have been wrong. But if you argue for the creation of a Guantanamo prison for all people that have been convinced by bad people that they could go to Syria to do something "right"...
 
What's the maximum sentence for it? AFAIK the thing he was charged with was attempting entry to Syria. He then was jailed for it, then had his documents taken so he couldn't leave the country. Then was placed under curfew after release. Only way you could deal with him would be to charge him with something else, then put him in custody until trial.
Don't know about France. Here we have a case where they are trying two guys who traveled to Syria and were stopped in Turkey and want them to give one 3 years, other 4 years. Other case has the them asking for 6 years sentencing. Third case I can see is asking for 3 years also. And yet another also 3 years. More cases then I expected actually, damn.
 
How will that help with anything? Most are willing to die for their cause and usually do.

It might keep them from harming others. Might sound disproportionate, but these ISIS people aren't normal criminals, so we can no longer deal with them like normal criminals. Why was he allowed out on the street? Because his sentence for attempting a journey to Syria ended and it was dealt with according to the law. Surveillance for 24 hours every day isn't going to let anyone know what his intentions for going to a place are, this clearly shows that.
 

Koren

Member
What's the alternative? The entire population is held hostage right now.
That wouldn't have helped in the Nice case, for example. It's not as if it would solve the problem.

Considering the only reason right now for going to Syria is pretty much joining a war.
You have to prove that the intent is to join a terrorist side, though. Some people can say they went there to provide humanitary help, for example. It can be tricky.

If you have someone with the intent of joining a terrorist organisation, who actually makes moves to do that - he is buying a ticket to Turkey probably and has plans to cross the border - what should we do with them?
That's an interesting question. Being REALLY cautious, at the minimum. Inprisonning all of them doesn't seems to be the end-all solution to me.

I think it wouldn't be unreasonable to lock those people up until the conflict there is resolved.
That could go for (tenths of) years, and the sentences should scale with the crime... More years in prison for attempt to reach Syria than for actual murder?

Intent to join a terrorist organisation is a crime if it can be proven here.
Indeed.

What's the maximum sentence for it?
Ten years at worst.

The idea is to arrest them before they attack.
Life sentence for what is mostly an intent?

Could update terrorism laws to have a maximum sentence of life or something like that, that's something I'd support.
For an actual terrorism act, I *may* accept it (even if I'd prefer e.g. a 30 years that can be indefinitively renewed as long as there're a single chance that it may act again to an actual life sentence).

But sentence of life for an attempt to travel to Syria?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom