I have blogged previously at some length
on the results of ignoring police or court requests to submit information eg
requests to plead guilty or not guilty to eg (relatively) minor motoring
offences or information regarding income or a driver`s identity. Such failures cost individuals time and money
and escalate the cost to the state of completion of outstanding cases. When such dilatory inaction is with regard to
environmental offences and heaven knows how these have increased in their scope
and punishments over the last decade the resulting retribution to the offender
can and usually should be such that a hard lesson is learnt. Such was a matter
recently. The owner of an establishment
which offered food and drink to customers whilst they enjoyed the dubious
pleasures of smoking shisha pipes had
ignored all the overtures from the council environmental officers who had
almost pleaded with him to comply with the legal requirements for such
businesses on the basis that post compliance he would have had only a fixed
penalty notice to pay and no further legal action would be taken against him. For reasons only the offender can explain not only
did he fail to take the council officers` advice he did not turn up at court to
argue his not guilty plea. He will shortly receive notice that he has 28
days to pay fines and costs well into five figures.
Comments are usually moderated. However, I do not accept any legal responsibility for the content of any comment. If any comment seems submitted just to advertise a website it will not be published.
Saturday 14 March 2015
Friday 13 March 2015
RUNNING FOR OFFICE
I never fail to be amused by some of the
sheer unadulterated rubbish that emanates from the mouths of politicians in the
weeks approaching a general election and in this early period of seeking
headlines it`s business as usual.
From the bowels of Petty France we learn
that there are to be new rules for prisoners committing violent acts in
prison. Forget the fact that it is
generally recognised that the circulation of drugs in prisons is to a certain
degree tolerated by the authorities as an assistance in keeping their charges
under control. Forget the fact that
warders` numbers have dropped by up to a third by government policy only to be gradually
increased by using agency workers. Forget the fact that the 80% of inmates
who smoke are to be deprived of their tobacco and nicotine ration. Forget the fact of H.M. Inspector of Prison`s
devastating criticisms.
So the victim culture so beloved by this
government is to be extended to the retail sector. Trying hard to retain his seat Labour
candidate and current M.P. David Lammy seeks to make the sentencing on theft from a shop dependent upon the size
of the shop. Such thinking is dangerous. The rich man robbed of his Bentley should see
his car thief punished less than the
car jacker of the poor man`s old
banger. But politicians are rarely
climbing the greasy pole to exercise their muscles.
From time immemorial the concept of
supply and demand has been a feature of the human condition but unlike King
Canute whose attempt to stop the tide was to demonstrate to his obsequious nobles
his limitations as a simple human being Justice Minister Shailesh Vara demonstrates
that ignorance is no bar to high office in arguing that increased court fees will not pose a serious risk to court services.
Whilst the lunatics are not yet running
the asylum (where there is one still in operation) they seem to have found the odd key to open the odd gate.
Thursday 12 March 2015
MORE PROPAGANDA FROM PETTY FRANCE
The public relations and press office of
the Ministry of Justice should feature in all schools of journalism as an
example of how to provide maximum publicity for “initiatives” which appear to
be from the school of Orwell`s 1984 where the world view of the inner party is
rotated through a prism of 180* for the proles.
Today`s press release announces the
lifting of the level 5 maximum fine of £5,000.
In keeping with previous similarly heralded announcements the practice
will be radically different from the impression given. Whatever the offence the fine applicable must
be related to ability to pay i.e. income or in rare cases; assets. That barrier in itself will considerably reduce
the number of offenders eligible for this “new” unlimited fine level. My
experience informs me that as far as CPS prosecutions are concerned this change
will make virtually no difference to the fines handed out in future years. Like many other innovative measures conjured
up by overpaid young things at Petty France we will hear little more of this
nonsense. Perhaps if they devoted
similar efforts to retrieving the one billion or more pounds currently
outstanding in fines, costs, compensations and surcharges this
cynical blogger would be more sympathetic to the most awful Lord Chancellor in his lifetime. As a final thought today
the wording of the release reinforces his impression that it is only a matter of
perhaps another two parliaments when lay benches at magistrates` courts will be
precluded from imposing custodial sentences. In such a scenario if J.P.s are
still sitting in a court environment which I very much doubt custody will be
the preserve of District Judges(M.C.)
Wednesday 11 March 2015
QUE? I KNOW NOTHING. I`M FROM BARCELONA
It had been at least two years since I
had last sat on a means court. There
were over forty on the list and about a dozen attendees. One common feature was that the “histories”
as recorded on the means files of each of them were so truncated as to be
almost meaningless. That being the case
where possible our L/A had to send for the original court files to be certain
of the facts and chronologies. But our
usher was functioning over two other courts also so it takes no imagination to
picture the pressure she was under. We
actually managed in the three hour session to deal with eight of the attendees the
remainder filling the downtime of other courts.
For the others listed (the non attendees) we sat at 2.00p.m. to decide
on warrants and then another blatant inefficiency in administration appeared
like Hamlet`s ghost. In order, as we had
expected, to issue warrants with or without bail we had to be sure that such a
warning was written on the summonses which had been served on those failing to
appear. But lo! No such warning had been written. What had
been
written as a last sentence was a warning to those who failed to show that “the
court would consider other measures” without explicitly mentioning the threat
of a warrant being issued. My colleague
and I with the consent of our L/A decided that in those circumstances it would
be unjust to issue warrants and instead they would be written to again to
appear at the next means court with a clearly worded threat of warrant with or
without bail for those who failed to attend at that later date. But and it`s a big “but” the original letters
were signed off pp not by a legal advisor, a legal manager nor a Deputy
Justices Clerk but by the Justices`
Clerk; he who must be obeyed who has ultimate responsibility for an entire
justice area. If he had actually approved
the wording it would appear he was not as competent as perhaps he should
be. If he had given the job to an underling
and allowed the latter to have his signature attached his management skills
were perhaps open to question. The
upshot of this seemingly minor carelessness was yet another hidden increase in
costs associated with time wasted and future time to be allocated. Add the myriad such situations in our court
systems owing to staff reductions, staff incompetence, low staff morale, poor
quality management and a box ticking mentality and it is quite clear why with
an induced reduced workload magistrates` courts are almost as inefficient in
practice as they were a decade ago notwithstanding all the statistics, video
gizmos and grandstanding by the Ministry of efficiently having adapted to a 23%
budget reduction and more to come. But what do I know?
Sunday 8 March 2015
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)