Jessica Sampleforth

Descendant of bastard son of John of Gaunt and Katherine Swynford

[Julia Hartley-Brewer @JuliaHB1]

Cringe

[Jessica Sampleforth @JezzaSamps]

@waitmaya 31

[Just99h @Justin270835]

@queru_lant Morocco migrants are still in Ceuta Spain 🇪🇸 running over the streets like crazy. This is a big danger and a invasion of europe we need to defend our countries. Today again knife attacks and stabbing of people, the police and army need to be aware! 👇🏼

[lorem ipsum @altashanta]

A esta pareja española unos marroquíes le usurparon la casa. Cuando intentaron recuperar sus cosas, GOLPEARON A LA MUJER ESTANDO EMBARAZADA HASTA DEJARLA INCONSCIENTE, y a su pareja LE ABRIERON LA CABEZA. Terminó con 20 puntos.

Esto defiende la izquierda.

[Jessica Sampleforth @JezzaSamps]

@Bushra1Shaikh His reason is that Islam and Sharia are incompatible with British values. Why is he wrong? You should try answering his point.

[Jessica Sampleforth @JezzaSamps]

@AlexTaylorNews Drop your silly entrenched politics, get real and save innocent lives.
https://t.co/3uFtie2UMV

[Anglo Restoration 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 @AngloRestore]

Moroccan Muslim invader stabs Spanish citizen in the neck

[Steven Barrett @SBarrettBar]

This is extremely serious.

[Allison Pearson @AllisonPearson]

Just William does politics:

[Nigel Farage @Nigel_Farage]

This lady shouted abuse at me and then crashed her own car.

That’s what you might call instant karma!

[Robert Jenrick @RobertJenrick]

Gary Lineker says he wants to pay *more* tax.

That’s funny because three years ago he took Government to court to pay *less* tax on his BBC millions.

Massive hypocrite? Surely not.

[MrFezziwig™ @MrFezz15]

Finally completed HS2 in Birmingham......

[Chris Rose @ArchRose90]

This is hilarious. A random woman drove past Nigel Farage and yelled “wanker.”

She instantly crashed her car straight after. I’ve watched this 30 times and still far from bored of it. 😂

[Nick Buckley MBE @NickBuckleyMBE]

Justice Is Not Colour Blind

According to the Guardian newspaper, 13th June 2007, ethnic minority jurors favour black defendants. Does this sound like racism to you?

The Ministry of Justice suspected this was happening, so it commissioned research. It revealed that black and ethnic minority jurors show more leniency to black defendants than their white counterparts. It found that they were "significantly less likely" to convict a black defendant than a white defendant on a non-race-related charge. And they are much more likely to convict white defendants than white jurors.

This bias is called "same race leniency". The offered explanation is that black and Asian jurors believe that the court system treats ethnic minority defendants more harshly, and jurors are subconsciously trying to level the playing field.

Professor Cheryl Thomas, who conducted the research, said: "We asked jurors their attitudes towards various aspects of the criminal justice system. BME jurors felt very strongly that the courts treated BME defendants more harshly than white. It was clear black jurors felt this more strongly than Asian jurors."

But do not worry about BME jurors perverting the course of justice because the professor also stated that the attitude of individual BME jurors did not alter the overall outcome of the trial. What? This is just a smokescreen so we do not kick up a fuss about being persecuted in court by non-white jurors.

In a study involving 27 simulated trials, the racial makeup of the defendant, victim and jurors was varied; defendants were almost always found not guilty by a majority verdict.
In one London court where there is a high proportion of black and Asian jurors, the conviction rates for black defendants are lower compared with other areas.
Another study in June 2002 in response to the Macpherson report showed the same ‘race leniency’. In non-race-related offences, only 12% of BME jurors found BME defendants guilty, compared with 26% of white jurors. But 59% of BME jurors found white defendants guilty compared with 33% of white jurors.

This is not a new problem. ‘Same race leniency’ has been known about since our experiment with mass immigration began. It may not have been researched or studied by academics, but people within the justice system could see it with their own eyes.
We have all seen American TV shows where lawyers reject specific jurors before a court case begins in the hope of a more favourable jury. To a certain extent, this used to happen here before the law was changed. Why was the law changed? An interesting question.
A peremptory challenge is the right to challenge jurors without stating a reason. A defendant could reject a limited number of potential jurors without providing any reason. This allowed both sides to shape the jury based on intuition, appearance, or perceived bias. The practice started in medieval England, where defendants in capital cases could use up to 35 such challenges. It was later reduced to 20 in 1530, seven in 1948, and three in 1977.

The Criminal Justice Act 1988 abolished the defendant's right to peremptory challenge a juror and aligned with recommendations from the Roskill Committee (1986), which criticised peremptories as an "erosion of the principle of random selection".

High-profile cases in the 1970s and 1980s highlighted the abuse of the system. The Mangrove Nine trial involved black activists charged after protests against police harassment. The defendants collectively used up to 63 peremptory challenges (seven each) to reject white jurors in an effort to secure more black representation on the jury. This strategy was used in other trials involving black defendants, such as the Bristol riot cases, where judges advised using challenges for racial balance.

“In a multiracial society, trial by verdict can result in communal prejudices influencing verdicts. I would rather put my future in the hands of a trained judge than in the hands of twelve men who can be swayed by prejudices or rhetoric. Jury trials may work in homogeneous societies, but not in sharply multiracial ones. You cannot assume that each juror will set aside his race, religion, and language. The jury system is part of an English tradition that presumes a common culture. That assumption cannot hold in a society like ours.” Lee Kuan Yew, the first Prime Minister of Singapore

Could this be the reason why the Labour government is trying to limit jury trials in the UK? Have they seen the data on our broken criminal justice system, the unconscious bias, and the obvious corruption?

Is this policy about heading off a problem before it enters the public realm? Why wait until the public is screaming about unfair courts and pointing the finger at mass immigration and racial loyalties? It would be sensible to fix the problem now.

Unfortunately for us, fixing the problem means destroying our thousand-year-old right to trial and to be judged by our peers.

Another great institution broken through immigration.

(the above is a section from my new book: Who Broke Britain? https://t.co/thZNTwImPE)

[GB News @GBNEWS]

'Ed Miliband has been consistently on the wrong side of foreign policy decisions...'

Former Conservative Minister Michael Gove reacts as Andy Burnham appoints Ed Miliband as his Foreign Secretary.

[Andrew Lawrence @andrewlawrence]

It’s all gone quiet hasn’t it? The mainstream media were all too keen to fill their pages and air time with lurid details of Ann Widdecombe’s murder, right up until the point where counter terrorism police took over the investigation and her alleged killer was discovered to be a far-left nutjob...

[Jessica Sampleforth @JezzaSamps]

@Tory_Brexit69 @DPJHodges Even better.

[Tommy Robinson 🇬🇧 @TRobinsonNewEra]

Ann Widdecombe killer has been publicly named as Joshua Kerry by the Daily Mail.

Couldn't look more far left if he tried.

No wonder "hope not hate" are deleting articles.

[Brunte 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁷󠁬󠁳󠁿🇬🇧 @Brunte84]

Since you mentioned Lady Thatcher, @andyburnham, here's a reminder of what she achieved 👇🏼

•⁠ ⁠Top rate of income tax: 83% → 40%

•⁠ ⁠Basic rate: 33% → 25%

•⁠ ⁠Inflation: 21.9% peak (1980) → 2.4% (1986)

•⁠ ⁠Days lost to strikes: 29.5 million (1979) → 1.9 million (1990)

•⁠ ⁠Real take-home pay for the average earner: up by a third

•⁠ ⁠Right to Buy: over a million council tenants became homeowners

•⁠ ⁠Home ownership: 55% → 67%

•⁠ ⁠Individual shareholders: 3 million → 11 million — one in four adults

•⁠ ⁠Foreign holidays: roughly doubled

•⁠ ⁠Homes with a telephone: two-thirds → nearly nine in ten

•⁠ ⁠Pensioners' average incomes: up around 30% in real terms

•⁠ ⁠Infant mortality: down almost 40%

•⁠ ⁠Real GDP: up by almost a third

•⁠ ⁠GDP per head outgrew France, Germany and Italy in the 1980s

•⁠ ⁠Manufacturing productivity: slowest growth in the G7 in the 1970s → fastest in the 1980s

•⁠ ⁠Self-employed: 1.9 million → 3.5 million

•⁠ ⁠Nissan to Sunderland, Toyota to Derby, Honda to Swindon

•⁠ ⁠Britain became a net oil exporter

•⁠ ⁠London restored as the world's financial capital in 1986

•⁠ ⁠Budget surpluses three years running — Britain repaid debt, 1987–90

•⁠ ⁠National debt: 47% of GDP → 28%

•⁠ ⁠State spending: ~45% of GDP → ~39%

•⁠ ⁠The civil service: 732,000 → 565,000

•⁠ ⁠Corporation tax: 52% → 35%; the small firms' rate: 42% → 25%

•⁠ ⁠Personal tax allowances: up more than 25% in real terms

•⁠ ⁠Higher rates of income tax: nine → one

•⁠ ⁠Death duties: fourteen rates → one

•⁠ ⁠Exchange controls scrapped after 40 years

•⁠ ⁠40+ nationalised businesses privatised — 600,000 employees moved to the private sector

•⁠ ⁠The 33 big state industries: took ~£500m from taxpayers in 1980 → paid £8.4bn to the Exchequer by 1987

•⁠ ⁠British Steel: world-record loss-maker (1980/81) → £733m profit (1989/90)

•⁠ ⁠BT, 1984: the largest share offer the world had ever seen

•⁠ ⁠"Tell Sid" broke the record again in 1986

•⁠ ⁠British Airways: nationalised loss-maker → profitable, private, "the world's favourite airline"

•⁠ ⁠The Channel Tunnel: launched — entirely privately financed

•⁠ ⁠The Falklands liberated in 74 days

•⁠ ⁠Backed Gorbachev early, stood with Reagan, and won the Cold War

•⁠ ⁠Three consecutive election victories and the longest-serving PM of the twentieth century ✌🏼🇬🇧

[Jessica Sampleforth @JezzaSamps]

@NorthernLassLaw @Mackenz81935556 @AllisonPearson They were giving the impression from the information they had that it wasn't politically motivated. They were giving the impression for many initial hours that it was a death by natural causes, ffs.

[Jessica Sampleforth @JezzaSamps]

@NorthernLassLaw @Mackenz81935556 @AllisonPearson Where do you differ from the view of the legal expert that it was "clearly a misjudgment"?
Police were wrongly reassuring Reform MPs that it wasn't politically motivated or terrorism, when it should clearly have been the first thought. They even arrested the wrong man.