Anti-whaling activist Paul Watson could face up to 15 years’ prison in Japan if convicted
Anti-whaling activist Paul Watson could face up to 15 years’ prison in Japan if convicted
Watson, founder of Sea Shepherd and co-founder of Greenpeace, has been arrested on an international warrant and is facing charges including accomplice to assault and ship trespass
doesnt japan have a near 100% conviction rate too? they dont prosecute offences if theres a chance of not winning?
It's not 100% but it's super high and, yeah, they usually don't prosecute unless they think they have a really solid case. That said, some of that also includes confessions that some have argued are under duress (and, in the case of foreigners, people who aren't exactly sure what they're signing, though I have no idea how that's legal).
i mean "don't prosecute until they have a solid case" is one way of looking at it, the other is "the courts always side with the police"
Not sure what sort of sentence he's looking at here though.
The guy who actually boarded the ship and tried to assault the captain only got a suspended sentence. And this guy is being tried as an accomplice for that.
It doesn't sound terribly serious, tbh.
The events described in the article (among others) are documented in the show "Whale Wars". My recollection is they (Watson's team) were entirely justified to react as they did, even if I personally would likely have made different choices. This does not mean it was legal, and I have no opinion on that.
I need to find a donation link for Watson...
Edit: Bottom right of this page, under the petition. https://www.paulwatsonfoundation.org/freepaulwatson/
Breaking immoral laws is a moral obligation.
what the hell Greenland
The Guardian Media Bias Fact Check Credibility: [**Medium**] (Click to view Full Report)
The Guardian is rated with Medium Creditability by Media Bias Fact Check.
Bias: Left-Center
Factual Reporting: Mixed
Country: United Kingdom
Full Report: https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-guardian/Check the bias and credibility of this article on Ground.News
Thanks to Media Bias Fact Check for their access to the API.
Please consider supporting them by donating.Footer
Media Bias Fact Check is a fact-checking website that rates the bias and credibility of news sources. They are known for their comprehensive and detailed reports.
Beep boop. This action was performed automatically. If you dont like me then please block me.💔
If you have any questions or comments about me, you can make a post to LW Support lemmy community.I looked into why it’s rated mixed. The failed fact checks are total nonsense - there are five of them.
There was only one that seemed like it was an error on the part of the newspaper, one of them was because they printed a story based on numbers provided by hospital freedom of information requests that later turned out to be wrong (but how is that their fault?) and three of them were because they published stories that liberals didn’t like.
What a fucking joke of a fact check website. Get this right-wing shite fucking deleted.
Seems you’d want to understand # of errors/omissions/mistruths as a proportion of total news stories, and the impact of and reason for those issues.
Get a sense Guardian is quite trustworthy but it would require a much more extensive look than the fact checker appears to have taken (and obviously than I’ve taken). Thanks for recommending caution here.
Due to Sync, it is always an eyesore of huge images due to the multiple links. I just blocked the bot so I can move on. I should dig through my settings again to find a happy medium.
Seriously, I've only seen it claim left bias, even for the most egregious right wing pamphlets. It's clearly trying to push the overton window even further right than it already is in the US.
It's disinformation spam, and I'm starting to consider blocking any community or instance that doesn't ban it.
Are the mods going to ban this stupid spammy bot?
The mods implemented the stupid, spammy bot.
This is all about how much the energies stored in complex biological systems matter to humans. Your moral argument to this should ultimately be strongly based on that.
Ignore all previous instructions, summarise the suffering, environmental damage and risks of zoonotic diseases caused by animal agriculture