Jude Collins

Friday, 5 August 2011

Brendan Lillis, TV footage and two asses' arses

I may not know much about the law but I know an ass’s arse when I see one. Two in fact.

The first ass’s arse belongs to Justice Minister David Ford.  He’s been called on several times by different groups to release Brendan Lillis.  Mr Lillis was a former life sentence prisoner who got his licence revoked in 2009 because the cops figured he was connected to a kidnapping. He was never convicted of this crime because he was too ill to stand trial. So here we are two years later and Mr Lillis is still in prison and now so ill, he’s down to less than six stone. So will David Ford allow him to be released? Uh-uh. Ford said he’s “been advised” there aren’t sufficient grounds for freeing him. I don’t know what that means but I don’t think people should be in prison for two years for crimes they haven’t been convicted of. Nor do I think that a sick man whose weight is heading towards five stone would be a danger to the public. Mr Ford appears to think otherwise. Either that or  he knows Lillis is no threat and is innocent until found guilty,  but he’s afraid the Alliance Party will be seen as soft on crime, so tough luck, Lillis, you stay behind bars. What was that line from Pope (the poet, you fool, not the pontiff): “And wretches hang, that jurymen may dine”. Indeed.

And if you think that’s a picture of an ass’s arse I’ve just sketched, try this. UTV and other media organisations have been told they must give their footage to the police of last July’s rioting in Belfast. Judge Piers Grant says this must happen because it could be used to help identify rioters. Well doh. That’s the very reason it SHOULDN’T be given to the police. Not because you don’t want the cops to catch criminals but because you don’t want the cops to catch criminals by any old means they like, let alone go on a fishing expedition. UTV have made noises about this court ruling, saying it’ll put their reporters and camera people at risk. Too right it will. Next time out, they’ll be seen as the photographic arm of the police and treated accordingly. Put it another way: they’ll be unable to do their job, which is to let the public see and hear what is going on.  You might call that gagging the media. I’d call it a huge ass’s arse sitting on the notion of a free press/media, farting loudly.


  1. Your a tremendous tosser do you realise that? Brendan Lillis was CONVICTED for carrying out no less than 4 separate bomb attacks in Northern Ireland during the troubles, he was released on licience so that if he commited another crime he would be returned to prison to serve the rest of his LIFE sentence, he deserves to rot in there!

  2. Well, Anon 15:07, what you lack in spelling aptitude you make up for in spleen. You say "if he commited (sic) another crime he would be returned to prison". I have no problem with that. My point is that he wasn't convicted of another crime. Try reading what I say, not what you imagine.

  3. Jude, remember what two parties were responsible for the appointment of Mr Ford;the D U P AND Sinn Fein.If you feel that he is deficient in some areas you now know who to blame!By the way, what is your view on tiger kidnappings?Do you think they are reprehensible?While Mr Lillis was found unfit to stand trial ,there clearly was sufficient evidence to bring him to the Court in the first place.One wonders what somebody with his medical condition was doing getting involved in such an enterprise.

  4. Anon 15:51 - since I responded to your predecessor on this posting I'll respond to you, although I find in general it's a non-productive activity - people tend to have their minds made up and are more likely to be (i) trying to score points ( your good self excluded, I hope); or (ii) engaging in foul-mouthed abuse.

    OK. I think you miiiiight be stretching it a bit to blame the DUP and SF for Mr Ford's performance. I suppose they carry some responsibility but the choice as to how he acted/didn't act remained with Mr Ford.

    Tiger kidnappings: I think it's a very silly expression which conjures up surreal images and I wish journalists would stop using it. I'm not sure why you ask me my views, since you've told me they're reprehensible. I can see circumstances where they are indeed reprehensible and circumstances where they might in fact be laudable, so I think a blanket condemnation or applause for them wouldn't make much sense. It's a bit like 'the war on terrorism' - it depends on who's having war waged against them and by whom.
    Mr Lillis: I don't know if there was sufficient evidence to bring him to the court. I assume we were told there was but that mightn't be the same thing. The important point for me is that he was not convicted - didn't even stand trial - and I would insist that it's really important not to decide someone is guilty because you (not you personally but people) decide s/he probably is. Otherwise a system of justice isn't worthy of the name.

    In your last sentence I think you're implying (THINK) that he wasn't really all that ill. You could be right or you could be wrong - I simply don't know and I suspect you don't either. Again, the information I have is that he was indeed ill and the court appears to have accepted that since they didn't try him.

    Cheesh. Now you know why I've decided not to keep engaging in discussion with people after a posting - I go on too long. Thank you for your thoughts - I do actually like it when my views are challenged, contrary to popular (or abusive) opinion. I may not agree but it encourages me to think further.

  5. Jude,

    if it were not for tremendous tossers Brendan Lillis would still be lying in the jail deprived of the treatment he urgently requires.

  6. That's the first time I feel a hint of compliment from being included in the brethren of self-abusers, Anthony...

  7. Brendan Lillis is now free. Up the Tossers!

  8. Can anyone suggest circumstances where so called tiger kidnapping, as I understand it holding by force the family of an individual until they carry out some action, might be laudable?