Wearing the Niqab in Court

[Roadster]

removed - Jennylives

[kibbs]

removed - Jennylives

[Roadster]

removed - Jennylives

[kibbs]

removed - Jennylives

[kibbs]

removed - Jennylives

[Roadster]

removed - Jennylives

[Glacier]

removed off topic - Jennylives

[JLives]

This is NOT a topic about genital mutilation, the sexiness of the niqab or Sharia law taking over. Stay ON topic please.

[kibbs]

mple. Our leaders ought to have an official government policy that states: "This is the way it is folks. You are welcome to move to our country to become citizens; you are welcome to observe your cultural and religious practices [as long as they don't violate the rights of others or violate our laws], but you must not impose your beliefs or practices on any other citizens."

when our country was first formed our laws were based on christian law and morality .we were founded as a christian society.our immigration policies reflected this ,they were racist and discriminatory.we put a head tax on Chinese .we only allowed people in who were like us to be citizens.as time progressed and we needed immigration to create growth,and our laws changed to accommodate. we were going to be a true multicultural nation where all peoples from any where in the world could practice there culture and religion .when all peoples pay tax to a government ,they can no longer have policy that caters specifically to christian heritage. that's why Christmas gets taken down a notch.our government and courts must consider all factors that might violate religious and cultural rights .it is that which we must sacrifice to live in a fair secular, non religious governed society.if we started ruling our country based on religious law again .we would be acting just as fundamentally as Iran.

[Roadster]

This is NOT a topic about genital mutilation, the sexiness of the niqab or Sharia law taking over. Stay ON topic please.

removed - Jennylives

But she is right! Law or not the topic is about the niqab in a court room, not sex, who takes over Canada and other things being added here. There is likely lots of room for threads on those points, no one said we couldnt have threads about those thoughts, just not where we are trying to discuss the niqab in a court room. Not like many of us havent been trying to say the same but Jenny has the ability to nix them off. Thanks Jenny!

And to Nibbs, we are not ruling on religion, we are hoping our courts will stay within the way our system has worked all a long, being able to view the accusers or the perp on the stand as has always worked, we cant hide those people from the jury or let them hide and expect a fair result. If we could have people would have been wearing big hats tilted low over the eyes, baseball caps and scarves and such and that has never happened, so no need for it now suddenly because one culture comes here and thinks its a good idea.
The face has always been clear of shadows and coverings and I am not willing to see that change.

[kibbs]

being able to view the accusers or the perp on the stand as has always worked, we cant hide those people from the jury or let them hide and expect a fair result. If we could have people would have been wearing big hats tilted low over the eyes, baseball caps and scarves and such and that has never happened, so no need for it now suddenly because one culture comes here and thinks its a good idea.
The face has always been clear of shadows and coverings and I am not willing to see that chang

Our courts ruled an exception in a special circumstance .I don't know how that can be interpreted as an invasion of culture and an acceptance of all face coverings in court ,i find this point of view exaggerated and promotes fear and intolerance.

[Roadster]

I dont agree with it at all. I cant see how Some cases would make it ok, unless the one wearing it is the accuser and she doesnt care about her outcome when a jury says they couldnt make a fair decission. Its not gonna work.
If the one wanting to wear the cover is the accused she should not have that choice. The accuser needs her expressions to be viewed.

[kibbs]

I dont agree with it at all. I cant see how Some cases would make it ok, unless the one wearing it is the accuser and she doesnt care about her outcome when a jury says they couldnt make a fair decission. Its not gonna work.
If the one wanting to wear the cover is the accused she should not have that choice. The accuser needs her expressions to be viewed.

i dont believe face your accuser is meant to see facial expressions.its to look that person in the eye, if they can see.if a dominant man stares down a woman he has raped. who knows what those facial expressions can be interpreted as. facial expressions can be faked and are not appropriate in a court of law.that is why they say justice is blind ,that is why it is the recorded word and not the facial expressions that are kept on record.

[oneh2obabe]

It's not the defendant who needs to see the facial expressions ... it's the lawyer(s) so they can determine what line of questioning to pursue.

[Roadster]

It's not the defendant who needs to see the facial expressions ... it's the lawyer(s) so they can determine what line of questioning to pursue.

And the jury, they cant get past information or use information not allowed to use, their job is to use what is shown in court while being questioned and they need a visual of the person being questioned with the answeres given. If they didnt they would not be sitting where they do with a plain view of those on the stand.

If a person ever took any speach training for any reason they would know that speaking in any situation includes body language, try getting a job with all that stuff on. Seriously, I know many who wear work clothing at work and their kijabs and other stuff at home and during non working hours. In some of the places I worked it would be dangerous to wear draping clothing, so should we change that and see people getting sucked up in machinery? Should we let them just do this for court only? No, in some certain places their clothing will not work and court is one of those places, they can let their potential job bosses determine their ability to do their job in such clothing, but court has always been face to face so lawyers and juries have the ability to see whats happening right there while its happening.