DRUG DRIVING

When new laws come into effect one would assume that all the “T”s have been crossed and all the “I”s dotted. In obtuse areas of the law it could be argued that if tweaks have to be made to new laws as prosecutions falter we have an appeal court to ensure justice is done and seen to be done.    To schedule new legislation in the area of motoring with the likelihood of thousands of prosecutions where there are still areas of doubt seems precipitous.  With regard to new laws related to driving under the influence of drugs Greater Manchester Police after their initial negative reaction to its enforcement have done an abrupt U turn.  Results of first such prosecutions in Manchester  might prove of interest.

DRIVING DISQUALIFIED AND 3rd PARTY INSURANCE

At my last motoring court I had two matters confirmed.  To my surprise not all comprehensive car insurance policies offer no cost  3^rd party cover as an automatic “extra” when driving other vehicles not on loan or hire.  As the specialist prosecutor said to me, “That is a privilege often offered to “older”  drivers...... with respect your worship”.  The other matter was one of law.  A driver disqualified from driving in this country cannot obtain a license from another E.U. state and expect to be legal in the U.K.  On that latter point some months ago a CPS prosecutor was unable to give a definitive reply when faced with that defence against driving whilst disqualified and the case was adjourned.

EYE ON THE BALL

When a foreign  defendant on police bail makes his first appearance on an either way matter involving fraudulent documents the question for the bench is whether to offer conditional bail as police have done, to consider additional conditions or to remand in custody.  We were in such a situation earlier this week.  The current conditions were residence, curfew and reporting.  It took us  a full two seconds in a huddle to ask ourselves why no travel restrictions and surrender of travel documents had been added.  The date of appearance at the crown court was pronounced with an order that the aforesaid documents be surrendered and a prohibition on any application for further such documents at which point the CPS prosecutor got to her feet to inform the court that the defendant`s passport had already been surrendered to police.  In the league of CPS errors and omissions that failure to offer information was hardly in the Premier League; indeed it was barely in the league of Sunday pub kickabouts but was just another indication that CPS once again had taken  their eye off the ball.

ARE SOME DV PROSECUTIONS POLITICALLY MOTIVATED?

Sometimes the progress of a case through the magistrates` court is so bizarre as to be beyond the wit of man.  Such was the situation in my trial court a couple of weeks ago.  We sat in our usual lofty position so that seated our heads were level with those standing before us.  The common assault in a domestic setting had, according to preparation for trial form previously known in 2014 as case management form .......oh how civil servants love to make unnecessary name changes to procedures or forms to validate their life on this Earth.......... required the court to make provision for a Punjabi interpreter  for the defendant.  On such a person failing to have appeared since being tannoyed every five minutes since 1.30p.m. an urgent request was telephoned at 2.05p.m.  We were told a replacement was nearby and that his E.T.A.  was 2.50p.m.  At that point CPS got to her feet to inform us that her witness`s interpreter was present but  that her  single witness the complainant (wife) had not only failed to appear but had made a withdrawal statement a few days after her original statement.  She had not responded to telephone contacts or personal visit by police since that second statement.  A penny was seen to drop into the mind of our L/A who had been perusing the “form”. Receiving confirmation that CPS had also ordered a Punjabi interpreter   she suggested that s/he be made available for the defendant. This was accepted and a call went out.  Our L/A cancelled the interpreter who was on his way.  After we had returned from five minutes downtime CPS in a fluster told us that unbeknown to her,  her interpreter had been released from the proceedings and had left the building.  On the bench three heads visibly drooped with three intakes of breath. Our L/A made a call to replacement  interpreter who, fortunately was quite near when asked to cancel and was now quite happy to fulfil his original contract.  As good as his word he appeared shortly after 3.00p.m. and stood in the dock with the defendant.  Expectation now was that CPS would have made an application to proceed on hearsay evidence or to adjourn.  She chose the latter option which was rejected whereupon she told us she could proceed no further without authority from reviewing lawyer at CPS.  With a note of surprise the chairman stated that never in such a circumstance had such an observation been made to him previously.  Ten minutes later she returned to tell the court she was offering no evidence.  The case was duly dismissed.  Another defendant in a DV matter had been pursued in the knowledge that the case was unlikely to be proved owing to the determined and known intention of the complainant to refuse to give evidence against her husband.  Was this in the public interest; a hurdle that CPS must overcome in order to proceed? It appears that many such cases are driven as much by political considerations as by strength of evidence.  The interpreter was happy.  He was being paid when he thought he had lost out.

TRANSFORM JUSTICE

As mentioned in an earlier post  this week I have had a brief  summary from my spy who attended Transform Justice`s recent seminar at the House of Lords chaired by Shadow Justice Minister Lord Jeremy Beecham on the subject of magistrates` training and development.  Of about seventy attendees the majority was magistrates.  The essence of the 90 minute discourse was Transform Justice`s Penelope Gibbs` one woman effort to professionalise the training of the magistracy of which she was a member for a short period a decade ago.  Her sincerity was clear and her previous experience on the bench informed  much of her comments.   Her arguments rested upon the experience in Scotland of the recently newly constituted Children`s Hearings Panels and the training of their panel members expounded by two senior officials involved.  Francis Crook who runs the Howard League of Penal Reform contributed mainly by describing specific examples which suited her long standing position of wishing to see the demise of custodial sentences under six months which effectively means the emasculation of the magistrates` courts lay benches.  Her presence was akin to inviting a turkey to comment on traditional Christmas menus.  There were four or five contributions from the audience which were not unduly critical of a need to improve training but which gave the impression that in the current circumstances professionalising the training of  Justices of the Peace as unpaid employees would have to be undertaken on a very careful path to retain their support.  Penelope Gibbs informed the audience that although invited to participate the Magistrates Association had declined.

HUBRIS

I don`t know how popular or otherwise the Commissioner of the Met is with his political masters or his rank and file but Nick Ferrari of LBC must be thinking his birthday and Christmas have come early this year.  The recent melt down during a live interview on air on Monday of the leader of the Green Party was truly a top of the bill event to be replayed years from now but only a couple of weeks ago in the same LBC studio the aforesaid head honcho could not remember the  anti-terrorism hotline telephone number.  What joy to see the powerful humbled.  Eat hubris Rifkind and Straw.

ADDENDUM

Sir Malcolm explained that as an MP he had time to go walking....read here what else he had time for including those activities which compensated for his meagre income (not salary; remember he said he wasn`t an employee).