Comments on "likely to be useful"

[Hide] original entry

I am rather slow on the uptake sometimes. I have only just discovered, reading about the Abu Hamza case, that in the United Kingdom it is presently a criminal offence to possess "a document or record containing information of a kind likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism".

Excuse me?

Here is a brief list of things that would fit that description.

• An English-[any_other_language] dictionary.
• A railway timetable.
• Any secondary school or university chemistry textbook.
• A map of London.

And those are just things that might be useful for the specific purpose of committing or preparing terrorism; the actual legal language is considerably broader.

Furthermore, it is not necessary for the prosecution to prove that you actually owned, or read, or even knew of the existence of the document. If it "was on any premises at the same time as the accused ... the court may assume that the accused possessed the document or record".

But all this is OK, because "it is a defence for a person charged with an offence under this section to prove that he had a reasonable excuse for his action or possession". So that's all right, then.

Once upon a time, it was a key principle of the UK justice system that everyone is to be presumed innocent until proven, beyond reasonable doubt, to be guilty. But of course it would be unreasonable to apply such a dangerous principle to terrorists. Where, of course, "terrorists" means "persons who have been accused of terrorism".

Apparently this masterpiece of paranoid imbecility has been part of UK law for nearly five years now.

Note: By reading the above, you have come into possession of information that might be useful to a terrorist. Please report immediately for attitude realignment therapy and termination.