So from where do you get your news? The local adda rumor factory??
Oh! Sorry! I forgot that the National Security Adviser briefs you personally every evening
Not really, but I am very well connected to police sources. These issues are being hotly discussed all over the country, not just in PDF. And the NSA does not brief me, I don't know him, he is from the IFS, but I certainly have access to another who has held that position, and I know his very carefully expressed, very guarded views.
No. It has to be conveyed to the court through sign language, or through smoke signals.
You should be delighted if it is not established. Why such frenzy?
More name dropping. Your psychological profile is now very clear.
As I said, everyone knows who I am and what I did. Who are you? What shameful information do you wish to conceal?
So these directors told you that individual IB officials need not share their inputs with the Department/Ministry before passing it to states?
This information comes to the SIBs on occasion, they generate it on occasion. In this case, the SIB in question was given the information, checked the movements of the parties in question. Since you are clearly ignorant of the organisation of the IB, there are state-wise Subsidiary Information Bureaus, headed by a Deputy Director, sometimes, exceptionally, by a Joint Director. They have a further organisation under them, going right down to the grassroots level.
A huge volume of data is generated by them, and by the states' own Intelligence Bureaux. For instance, in Bengal, there is an SIB belonging to the IB, and a separate state-run IB under the Home Secretary (although the DGP and IG is the head of the cadre, he is not entitled to receive reports from the IG IB, nor does he write the confidential report of that officer).
Not all of this volume of data goes to the political leadership. Only selected bits summarised and digested are put up for information. It is very, very rare that information of this sort would be put up.
What cannot have been put up is any intention of a rogue officer to intervene. It is impossible that Rajinder Kumar should have informed the Director, or the Home Minister, or the Prime Minister of his intention to participate in a murder.
[quote}Prior conduct is not relevant in criminal trials. In any case none of these cases have been proved so far.[/quote]
The point was that
mens rea has been established in preliminary hearings. Not that the case has or has not been proved. The point was that an identical
mens rea only need be provided. No prior conduct is implied, only that the same
mens rea is likely to be quoted.
Know CBI's conviction rate ? leass than 1%.
Consoling yourself? If that is so, why all the foaming at the mouth?
Whatever. I guess I have made my point pretty clear and there is no need to go in circles nor there is anything I need to prove to you. As I said there is no need for the whole "i-just-want-the-law" rhetoric since we both know this case transcends that and enter the political realm. Ultimately both you and I have the same amount of stake in this democracy - one vote and I know who I am going to vote. And just dont, DONT, for a second think that tactics like branding everyone of the opposing your pov as sangh parivar (guess you still havent understood that most people dont see that as an issue) or cheap shots like "your pet lawyers" wins you the interwebz. It doesnt.
It doesn't have to win the interwebz, which only you and your pack-mates are contesting. It just has to drop the poll results of the communal faction by a few more seats. Dropping the corrupt Congress is a different battle.
Yeah right. Please feel good about yourself.
I do. Quite honestly. Rather unlike the hatred and bile coming out of the pack of rabid dogs milling about.