We are told that it is commonly thought by foreigners that if s/he is eg stuck in a lift with an English person or waiting in a queue for a late arriving bus that if there is an irresistible urge to break the silence then one subject that is unlikely to be ill received is to discuss the weather. This is understandable insofar as we are all in one location subject to the same aberrations of climate. In a wider sense we are all citizens living under the same law but outside those directly involved few take any interest until they or friends and/or family are personally involved. I suppose that in some infinitesimally small way this blog has been purposed to offer a single ray of light on the legal umbrella supposedly offering all of us equality before the law and the prevention of injustice striking us down. Truth be told we all know that is just pie in the sky but as an ancient Chinese adage tells us every journey however long begins with just one step.
Faith in the high standards of our judiciary has been a mantra politically for decades if not for centuries; that is until events show the contrary. If eg a surgeon`s statistics reveal an unusual number of failed outcomes sooner or later some investigative body or another will announce the results of its inquiries and with appropriate press releases police will be called in. But what happens when we learn of senior level judges proving to be wanting in their sentencing decisions when an Appeal Court`s findings are diametrically different. In this case it seems that it was not just literally an error of judgement. Will we ever hear of any resulting chastisement of the judge?
Today the Met Commissioner announced that his force will no longer investigate non crime hate incidents. This decision follows the recent arrest at gunpoint of the writer of the wonderful TV series Father Ted. Perhaps this is an indication that the British idea of free speech lives to fight another day. Whatever one`s opinion this lengthy article might stimulate some consideration of the subject.
An unashamed publication advancing its own political viewpoint is protected in our society and rightly so. However not all its readers will want to know or be aware of an opposing outlook. This example would not want to inform its readers that for this country arms trade balance with Israel is very much in favour of the UK. In the most recent year for which full UK figures are available the UK granted export licences for military goods to Israel worth £18 million in 2023.
More than once I have offered my thoughts on the inevitability of AI sentencing at the magistrates courts. This article in the Law Society Gazette and the comments of those perhaps likely to be involved might shed some light on the thinking of some legal eagles.
The phrase "all human life is there" is strongly associated with the John Hilton Bureau, an advice column run by the News of the World newspaper from 1942 to 1969. This phrase became the title of historical articles and analyses about the bureau and its role in advising the public on a vast range of personal matters during and after the Second World War. Nothing could better describe this report in Tees Side Live. Having occasionally mourned the death or dearth of local court reporting this item gives me pause for thought however distasteful.
The highest fine ever imposed by a bench where I was presiding was on a "company" fly tipping: that figure was some thousands less than the rogues involved here required to stump up. The big question is when if ever will the fines and costs be paid. Precedence does not predict a happy conclusion.
Re my comment above on court reporting it is truly wonderful that Cornwall Live about whom I have been happy to offer praise has invested time and money in reporting news from the county`s courts. Such reports as here used to be commonplace where a suburb or district had its own print news outlet. Sadly these days are history but from this furthest west county of England is a fine example of what is possible. The next step will be the live transmission from the actual magistrates remand court when legal and financial limitations are overcome.
Next month the City of Westminster council will require every property within its boundary to be registered and licensed if it is rented out to tenants; from the swankiest self contained penthouse apartment within parliament`s division bell to houses of multiple occupation in areas with the highest levels of deprivation including Queens Park, Mozart Estate, Lisson Green Estate (Church Street) and Warwick Estate. Compulsory questions that must be answered by those in receipt of rents include mortgage details, leaseholder(s), tenant agreement, criminal history (if any), room sizes and positions, facilities and/or appliances in kitchen and bathroom(s) and much more. All this to cost the landlord close to £1,000 with a fine of up to £30,000 for those landlords who fail to register but continue to let their properties. Annual retention fees are as yet unknown. No doubt there will be unintended consequences. Things are done differently in Sheffield.
Finally for today there are those drivers who enjoy the occasional alcoholic beverage who are unaware of the law concerning being "in charge" of a vehicle whilst intoxicated. This driver was fortunate that according to the sentencing guidelines which were followed by the bench, he was allowed to drive from court if he wanted to.
In 2023, there were 29,529 people convicted for the offence of “driving or attempting to drive a motor vehicle while having an alcohol concentration in excess of the prescribed limit”. Surprisingly there are no figures for the numbers convicted for the offence as was the driver above. The only numbers available seem to be that between 2005 and 2015 there were 15,454 convictions for being in charge while over the limit (S.5(1)(b)). My researches show that fewer than 1,000 – 1,200 convictions per year in England & Wales and only a minority (perhaps one in five) results in a disqualification; most receive endorsement points instead as did our offender above.
It is strange as to why there is little information from the MOJ on this offence. It raises some points eg a solitary figure sitting in the driver`s seat is unlikely to arouse police suspicions, are the figures correct because there are few such offenders, police are more concerned with those who are actually driving intoxicated and have fewer worse crimes to investigate with their limited resources.
Finally it seems that pressures from Islamists that criticism of their religion constitutes an offence akin to antisemitism but without the safeguards that the latter has in law is not going as planned. Its protagonists refuse to accept that the latter is hate against Jews for what they are but any so termed phobia is just criticism of a religion which can be likened to accusations of blasphemy the legislation on which was repealed in 2008 under the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act.
But there it is all around us: above and below left and right; the law of England & Wales.
No comments:
Post a Comment