Tony Hall has lived in the UK for 50 years. Why is the Home Office trying to deport him?
He arrived in the UK aged 12, but for the last 14 years Hall has been under threat of being sent back to Barbados – a country he doesn’t remember and where he has no surviving relatives.
All this time he has been kept on a deportation list, which means he cannot work, rent somewhere to live, receive benefits or do anything that would allow him to start rebuilding his life. Instead, he remains on the edge of destitution, reliant on the kindness of family and friends to survive.
In 2001 he was convicted of a serious crime – conspiracy to rob and having a firearm with intent; he spent eight years in prison. He had been planning with friends to hold up a security van taking money to a bank; he was carrying a toy gun, but there was also a real gun in the car. Police stopped them before a crime was committed.
The principle of rehabilitation suggests that Hall, having served his sentence, should then have been allowed to restart his life, as his co-defendants did.
Every fortnight Hall must attend an appointment at a Home Office reporting centre, carrying a document printed with his mugshot above a letter that warns him he is liable to be detained “pending a decision to deport you/because a decision has been made to deport you”. The journey there takes him the best part of two hours, and involves a few stops on the overground, a short bus ride, then six stops on the underground and another bus ride, followed by a queue at the reporting centre, a brief checking of documents and the reverse trip home. By now, he estimates that he has performed this time-consuming ritual more than 350 times.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2026/oct/19/tony-hall-has-lived-in-the-uk-for-50-years-why-is-the-home-office-trying-to-deport-himOpen linkView original on lemmy.world
19 replies
Should've deported him years ago.
I really shouldn't ask, but why?
Not a citizen, committed violent crime. It's pretty simple, it's in the article.
25 years ago and he's done the time. Man has paid his debt to society and should be left alone.
Well, maybe if he had been deported right after the crime (which wasn't violent, it was a planned robbery). That's the strongest argument you could make, to not punish him here but instead deport him. But he wasn't, he served his time in the country he committed the crime (pretty standard I think) so now there is no reason to deport him.
What would it help to deport him? Wouldn't help him, he doesn't have any family where he was born. Wouldn't help the state, or anybody in the UK.
The current state of things is also ridiculous. He can't work, he has to waste government money and time checking in every two weeks. Travel which he has to pay out of pocket even though he has no job, god forbid he can't pay one day and is arrested. For 14 years this waste of time has happened.
He was planning to threaten with a gun (real or fake) which is considered a violent crime. Armed robbery was his intention.
The fact he was arrested before he managed to threaten anyone is a moot point.
He could’ve just accepted being deported and moved on with his life. He chose limbo and it seems that is all but guaranteed to push him into further crime as there’s no other way to make a living.
Deporting him solves the problem for the UK as he ceases to be their problem. Not deporting him at the end of his incarceration is the strange part.
I will preface this with :
So know that im not defending the legal system here, just stating that weak/innacurate arguments weaken whatever position you try to build upon them.
Planning a violent crime, even with intent, isn't considered a violent crime in and of itself, as it involves no violence.
Intent and action are different things, which is why there are separate names and crimes.
The argument that they deserve the same punishment is interesting though and (I think) sometimes valid.
If deportation is a named consequence of the crime(either part of the sentence or a consequence of having a criminal record of that nature) then they should have been deported immediately.
If it is not, then they have paid for their crime and tagging consequences on after the fact is vigilante behaviour.
To be clear, im not arguing against vigilante justice here, just pointing out that it would be extra-judicial, making whoever preformed that action a criminal as well.
https://www.ukimmigration.law/uk-deportation-lawyers/crimes-that-lead-to-deportation/
UK was a lot softer back then.
Interesting, seems they did in fact put him on a plane, he came back because barbados refused him entry (due to him being a long time resident of the UK)
It also sounds like he should already be a de-facto citizen but isn't because of long term governmental incompetence.
No, I never said not punish him. Punish him then deport him. What would it help? It'd guarantee that he wouldn't commit more crime in a county he's a guest in.
Critical reading doesn't seem your strong point buddy. I'm reading an entirely different story.
Entirely different? Or you refuse to admit that conspiracy yo commit violent crime is less dangerous than actually being violent?
Buddy.
Sure. There's a lot of context to consider here, but seems you comprehension is quite limited.
Not really. You've overcomplicated the topic.
By definition it's less dangerous.
One involves the violence, one is the planning of the violence (with no actual violence having happened).
It implies multiple parties and the intent to commit the violence in the future, but the violence hasn't happened yet.
If they were the same ting there wouldn't be a separate term and or crime.
It sounds like you want to argue that the planning (with intent) should carry the same sentence and repercussions, which is an entirely valid argument, have at it.
Pretending that planning and execution are the same exact level of danger serves only to undermine what might otherwise be a well reasoned argument.
I'm not advocating for minority report. The other user said an entirely different story, which it isn't. I said violent when it doesn't even matter in this instance.
Only a horrible kind of person plans to commit violence, and I said they should've been deported earlier on.
Your lack of compassion isn't a good look